IPS Affiliation

  • 412 Parents
  • 93 IPS Employees
  • 23 IPS Parents & IPS Employees
  • 4 IPS Alumni
  • 4 Community Members
  • 4 IPS Parents & IPS Alumni
  • 4 IPS Students
  • 3 Former IPS Parents
  • 149 Didn’t Identify

Based on committee feedback, one of the potential solutions is to expand/replicate high demand, higher-performing programs. Which school specific program would you be most interested in expanding or replicating (ex: CFI, Butler Lab, dual-language, Montessori, visual/performing arts, STEM, etc.)? IPS Affiliation Phone E-mail Try to replicate programs elsewhere if you believe that will work. Also, it’s not just the programs that work or a model that makes a school successful. I believe you are grasping at straws in a tough situation and ideas are proposed without serious intellectual rigor or real understanding of the impact.

  • Stem, dual language
  • Montessori, STEM
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Leave the neighborhood schools that work, including proximity. Neighborhood schools can be important to friendship and socialization, especially middle school aged children. Try to replicate programs elsewhere if you believe that will work. Also, it’s not just the programs that work or a model that makes a school successful. I believe you are grasping at straws in a tough situation and ideas are proposed without serious intellectual rigor or real understanding of the impact. 
  • Go attend the schools, really sit there and see what’s going on before you expect a child from halfway across the city to thrive in a far away school . There are disadvantages to putting children in an environment and assuming the model is what has made a school successful and that it will be beneficial for that child. It’s ham fisted, like what IPS did when it tried to consolidate the high schools.
  • None. Invest in the low economic schools.
  • No opinion don’t have enough knowledge
  • No opinion
  • Montessori (with a focus on being truer to method)
  • Montessori, Visual/performing arts, Dual-language and STEM.
  • STEM
  • Dual Language
  • N/A
  • Yes. These programs are great and it shows with enrollment.
  • Stem and visual performing arts
  • I think all of them are good models to replicate. I personally don’t have a preference and think that it should be highly based on neighborhood input where the school will be located.
  • Really like C F I. Don’t have experience with the others.
  • STEM, Performing Arts
  • Visual/performing arts
  • Dual-language
  • STEM
  • Montessori
  • Any of the programs! Whatever the surrounding area feels would benefit the students the best.
  • STEM
  • I think those are all great options – should be evaluated based on demographics of a specific area
  • STEM
  • Dual-Language
  • STEM
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • I’m interested in seeing publicly-operated IPS schools expanded.
  • STEM
  • STEM/Medical
  • My child doesn’t attend any of the example schools, but I do know that the elementary and middle school combined model is a huge draw for many parents, including our family, and one integral reason these schools are doing so well. We specifically left a township elementary school for a 2-8 IPS school because our child was being lost in the shuffle of a k-5 school with over 700 kids. He did not know the principal or counselors and they didn’t know or care about him and his needs. When teachers changed mid year, he and his classmates were just 1 out of 30 elementary classes in the school that barely recognized they existed and no support was provided. There was no community because there were so many young kids going through the school, and middle school was equally overwhelming for our neighbor who moved to a stand alone middle school. We do not want IPS to replicate the huge and impersonal township schools. They are not better or “right.” The gift of the various models in IPS and K-8 is that students get to choose between the existing k-8 schools or transition to one of the existing 6-8 middle schools if they want. K-8 and 2-8 schools mean that families that want to be in a community where there child is known and honored as individuals are supported by staff and administration from elementary through the turbulent middle school years. Students struggling with stability at home are able to have stability and a supportive community and staff at the same school from elementary through middle school with the combined elementary and middle school model.
  • Additionally, replicating does not mean changing. The K-8 and 2-8 schools are doing well as K-8 and 2-8 schools. “Replicating” them in other areas of the city would mean creating more K-8 or 2-8 magnet schools in other areas if those neighborhoods want them after doing proper community needs assessments. It is the opposite of the scientific method IPS teaches to change more than one variable when testing a replication. The variable you are already planning to change is opening program specific magnet schools in different neighborhoods with varying populations. Also changing the configuration of the schools to k-5 and k-8 adds another variable that could cause these models not to work in different areas with different populations.
  • Dual language
  • STEM
  • STEM
  • Visual/ performing arts, or STEM
  • dual-language and STEM
  • Yes, with proper training and vetting of staff.
  • Dual-language, Montessori, and Visual/Performing Arts
  • n/a
  • visual/performing arts, STEM
  • Montessori
  • dual-language! There are so many students that would benefit from the opportunity to improve their Spanish heritage language skills and I feel like in a city our size we should be offering more in this area.
  • Montessori
  • visual/performing arts
  • Montessori
  • any! In all neighborhoods
  • Montessori, other K-8 schools
  • Performing arts/STEM
  • I like the flexibility of neighborhood schools and their ability to pull ideas from multiple teaching philosophies. I would like to see the district invest in the neighborhood schools, providing them with the proper funding and supports to meet the needs and population they serve. Our neighborhood schools are the ones serving those transient populations, students with unstable housing, students who are moving into the district mid year. I want to be sure that the district is looking not only at the success of programs on paperbut also recognizing that the populations of students served in the neighborhood schools may not reflect as “success” in the testing scores or stability calculations in the same way. This is because they aren’t serving the same students. I want to see the authentic community engagement, the accessibility of having programming/extra curriculars close to home, and the connections built in my neighborhood school replicated throughout the district.
  • I believe that our district and students would fair well with a Performance Arts Academy. As a parent of 2 Broad Ripple Graduates, a GWHS Alumni, and employee I have see the results of a program that provides our students opportunities to express themselves in a positive manner. When we had magnet programs, Broad Ripple was one of the top programs in the district, and produce students who are now making their mark in the Entertainment industry Today, and in the world. But more that that those students were stellar scholars academically as well. Behavior issues were very minimal, and the student body and staff thrived. For those students who are not interested in sports, they need an outlet to allow them to express themselves creatively, which will greatly reduce the stressors and mental issues they have to deal with daily. If the district is interested in truly providing social and emotional outlets for our students, then I believe that investing in comprehensive performance arts program, that could feed our students into post secondary opportunities in the Arts, would benefit our students greatly. Students are constantly asking me about dance, music, poetry, visual arts, digital art etc., but there is no where in the direct, nor in Indianapolis for them to fulfill their passion to create in the area of performance arts. Granted we have many dance studios throughout this city which our students could attend, however the main obstacle for many is financial/transportation. Parents do not have $165 per week for dance classes, or time to sit for a 2 hour practice 3 times a week, etc. Please reopen Broad Ripple, and please make it a performance arts CTE Program.
  • Dual language. My child began pre-k at GPA 44 as a non-native speaker of Spanish. We are extremely pleased with the immersion model and see the personal growth in their language skills in both English and Spanish. The cultural aspect of learning directly from a native speaker in addition to rounding out the language immersion with cultural integration is a winning combination.
  • We see much value in the Montessori, but they all have merit.
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • ?
  • Montessori
  • Dual language and visual performing arts.
  • STEM
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Dual language
  • Stem
  • Butler Lab
  • It’s clear the charter/lottery schools are the only IPS schools performing at close to acceptable standards. I fail to understand why all IPS schools aren’t converted to these programs.
  • Montessori
  • I would like to see more STEM programs available.
  • Paideia
  • Montessori
  • Stem
  • I feel there are benefits in expanding any of these models. My concern is the amount of time and money it takes to set up new IB schools, as well as the extensive training necessary for the staff of these buildings.
  • STEM
  • Montessori
  • Dual Language and high ability
  • Expanding Montessori would be fantastic.
  • All programs should be expanded to offer a variety of programs in all 4of IPS district.
  • STEM
  • IB
  • STEM
  • Montessori
  • Montessori, Visual/Performing Arts, STEM, and STEAM
  • Stem, visual and performing arts
  • I would love to see more dual-language and STEM programs added
  • All of the above
  • Stem
  • Montessori
  • Montessori, STEM
  • Dual language
  • Dual-language
  • Stem
  • How can you replicate these programs you reference while going from K-8 to K-5/6-8? Part of what makes those schools special is that they are K-8.
  • Any
  • We are already a part of the Montessori program. The depth of content knowledge , the use of lower grade manipulatives and the overall belief in grace and courtesy have been amazing for my 3 kiddos. We believe a 4th Montessori would be a great opportunity for other parts of Indy.
  • Dual language
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • No
  • visual/performing arts, magnet
  • Montessori
  • I would chose the programs that had the best outcomes and longest waitlists.
  • I don’t have an opinion. I think you should focus on the interests of families in neighborhoods that have had less access to magnet programs in the past.
  • Montessori
  • The most appealing thing to us about moving to the district is the diversity of options in this regard…being able to pick schools types where each of our very different children can succeed. All of these are valuable and should be expanded. Picking one is counterproductive.
  • Montessori
  • I think all of these are great options. IPS should strive to keep the options balanced unless certain ones are in particularly high demand.
  • Sidener academy
  • Montessori
  • Dual-language & Stem
  • dual language
  • Stem & dual language
  • Whichever performs best across socioeconomic and other demographic groups.
  • No preference
  • Stem
  • N/a
  • Dual-language
  • Sidener. We need more high quality high ability services in every school
  • STEM
  • Visual/performing arts
  • My daughter is doing well at 87 Montessori, so Montessori programs seem worth expanding/replicating. Also, as a lifelong musician, I firmly believe in the need for visual/performing arts at schools. Also STEM programs seem really needed for our future economy
  • Dual language
  • Stem
  • I am excited for all of IPS and the high demand/high performing schools. My concern is if the vision and philosophy are not completed ingrained as we replicate these schools how high demand will they be…and how does that reflect the schools they are replicating? Proper funds to allow for teacher and staff to attend workshops, professional development and training for them to be highly effective.
  • visual/performing arts, dual-language, Montessori
  • Montessori
  • I think replication sounds amazing. Given teacher shortages and the thrash these schools have faced over the last few years due to covid, I think abrupt expansion or changes will likely destroy those schools who are doing well. I don’t like the expansion plan for that reason.
  • High ability
  • STEM
  • Montessori
  • I like IB and Montessori as my children had good experiences in those programs.
  • I think this is fine if it’s what the parents at neighborhood schools also want.
  • I suggest the district work to have a balance of program options available equally across the district, and encourage like programs to work together across the district as teams to share resources, training, and potentially even faculty/staff. (The geographic spread might be harder given the way IPS has already concentrated these high-demand programs on the north side.)
  • None
  • Montessori
  • The current model is successful. A Montessori school from PK thru 8th is the model. Replicate the model in other parts of the school district if that is what the community wants.
  • I would love to see a variety of offerings in various neighborhoods and I am deeply invested in Montessori but I don’t think the model is what leads to better outcomes. I would love to hear what families of color and families who are FRL desire and be responsive to that.
  • Montessori
  • Dual language
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Dual language
  • Our family is very passionate about Montessori and I believe the Montessori method can be hugely beneficial l to all kinds of kids. I also know that Montessori classrooms are expensive (2 teachers per class, specific materials needed, specific size of classrooms needed, etc). Because of this I have a lot of questions and concerns about the affordability of adding Montessori schools to the IPS district although I would love to see it happen. I don’t have experience with the other schools/programs so can’t speak to them.
  • I also wonder what efforts will be put into recruiting and removing barriers (communication, transportation) for families who are not in any of the choice schools to attend a choice school which would be completely new to them. Is there a way to put effort and support into improving existing neighborhood schools and/or transitioning neighborhood schools to become specialty schools? Do families and students currently in neighborhood schools want to change schools and will opening up seats at those schools mean that they would automatically change?
  • STEM
  • Dual language in middle school please!!! It’s a no-brainer!
  • Arts
  • Whichever format has the biggest waitlist
  • I would be most interested in continuing the current schools and adding/expanding additional schools in underserved areas. Instead of replicating schools that work well in the current settings in new settings, wouldn’t it make more sense to come up with additional specialized schools that serve the needs of each neighborhood? In the previous survey, we were asked about equity and how re-structuring schools with a broad-stroke changes to the district was the only way of increasing equity. However, this survey doesn’t even contain the word equity. Why has the content of the survey changed? It’s bit confusing to have answered all the previous questions regarding equity issues in the district and how the new solutions would work into what schools that I want to see continue. Given the previous questions, I think it’s clear that we cannot simply replicate what works well in a completely different setting and expect it to work well. Instead, why not keep the schools but update/improve those in underserved communities to increase equity and meet the specific needs of the community that surrounds each school? For example, Sidener academy has done a great job representing the overall district’s diverse make up of students (in terms of income and race/ethnicity) while serving high ability students with individualized plans with many twice exceptional students. I think the Sidener academy is the ideal model to replicate as it serves many different needs (across the district given the students come from all over the district) and has done an exceptional job at that. I think simply replicating what currently works well isn’t the only or the best solution but since I am being asked to choose one, I would say Sidener given its excellent commitment to its students, how diverse it is, how well it serves its community members, and how it allows highly individualized education and instruction within a public school setting.
  • All – I feel the variety and choice is the most appealing. It would be wonderful to be able to chose based on which school fit my child and not a lottery to which can they get into
  • I am interested in learning more about how you define high performing. It is clear that picking up a model and putting it into another area isn’t working yet. Look at 27 compared to 70 and 84 in ILEARN results. I live on the south side, and Skillen, 19, and Brandes have awful ILEARN results. Skillen barely moved from 21 to 22 in ILEARN and Supper School 19 WENT DOWN! 19 already is a different model, and it is not working. The only schools to grow in my area were Emma Donnan and 65. We are moving our family to Emma because of this.
  • I believe the programs that should be first replicated are the programs where demand can sustain them by using Enroll Indy data to look at school selection priorities within the zip codes of the applicants.
  • No preference. Any of them would likely do. The focus should probably be where those new programs are offered. Where are the students that want to get into these programs but are being waitlisted? Which have the longest waitlists? Focus there first.
  • Montessori
  • This is a good idea but will you hold them accountable? I don’t get how you all still partner with KIPP. They started an elementary school with just Kindergarten and they have awful results. Awful ILEARN scores that just keep going down. Hold them accountable. They are failing kids.
  • Montessori
  • I think expanding all of the programs and allowing for choice depending on the individual
  • Dual language
  • Stem
  • Lab schools
  • More Montessori and expand arts
  • All of them
  • Dual-language
  • Visual/performing arts
  • Dual language, v/p arts, STEM
  • Dual Language, STEM
  • Montessori has been great for our family and I think meets a lot of kids where they are at.
  • All deserve replication
  • STEM + what the people in those neighborhoods want Montessori does not work for all!!! Needs a lot of parent involvement and willing to take on a Montessori philosophy in the home. Just because they’re successful in one location doesn’t mean they will be anywhere.
  • Dual language
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Dual language
  • Yes
  • Montessori, but all of the above
  • All of them
  • Montessori, Visual/Performing Arts, STEM, STEAM
  • Dual-language (Global Prep), classical/liberal arts (Herron Classical)
  • STEM
  • Yes
  • STEM
  • STEM
  • Montessori, gifted
  • Paramount
  • I’d be interested in neighborhood schools having input on which format to adopt. While I personally love the Lab School and would have loved to have it in my neighborhood at 57 all these years, I also know it only works with community buy in. It also takes a toll on existing schools to help replicate and build new versions when they have to lose critical staff to new schools, etc. as well.
  • I see benefits in growing all of these programs to continue to offer choice to families! Personally we have chosen a Montessori model for our daughter, but that choice was also influenced by the fact that it was a K-8 school with a more diverse student body and a strong track-record of success as well as exposure to foreign language and other electives.
  • Montessori
  • Dual language
  • The dual language immersion program at Theodore Potter. It is an incredible community with generations of longevity among our families. Our students build a strong foundation to be bilingual, and many graduates have tested out of years of Spanish at the college level.
  • I think replicating would be a great idea, especially in the areas of the city where the magnet/choice programs are not a convenient drive for families, especially ones who may lack transportation.
  • Montessori and Sidener
  • We love our Montessori school – without this program, we would likely leave IPS to find a better solution for our children.
  • To truly create equal opportunity and the right fit for all, it would seem necessary to replicate many different types schools based on each of those different teaching methodologies. I think it’s clear there is not one approach that works well for all students.
  • Montessori
  • Languages need to be more important and serious in every school
  • I believe that all of these choice schools should be replicated. I believe that every IPS school should be a choice school. Every child should get the best education. All schools should be the best! Every child should get the choice of what school is best for them.
  • Montessori
  • Sidener Academy – High Ability Programming
  • STEM
  • nature-based, visual/performing arts, STEM
  • IB program
  • Where can one further give feedback and participate in this conversation? The schools listed above are successful thanks for parent involvement. Unfortunately, all parents don’t have that privilege. Simply implementing a curriculum will not change disparity. And splitting K-8 schools isn’t replicating. It is changing successful programs to model less successful programs.
  • All of them.
  • Montessori.
  • I hope we do not need to make these changes and are able to keep our schools unique.
  • Replication of a variety of teaching pedagogies in different neighborhoods would provide several options for students to find the situation that works best for them and their learning styles. I appreciate that this depends upon family engagement and effort.
  • Montessori
  • I think they all have value and are part of what makes IPS unique, having choices within the public school system.
  • STEM
  • dual-language
  • Montessori
  • One on one tutoring
  • Montessori with high school option
  • Montessori
  • They all work for different kids…we like Sidener for our oldest and Herron Prep for our youngest.
  • Dual-language
  • Montessori or Reggio
  • Any
  • Dual language
  • I think it would be difficult to replicate the programs without the high quality of leaders that we have now. This would take training and high quality pay to recruit the people needed . It also takes an extremely willing and active community to replicate these programs and you cannot do it without real support in the form of time and treasure from parents and students. These are critical pieces that could be missing when trying to replicate any of these programs at other schools.
  • Montessori and dual language
  • Montessori would be my family’s pick, but I would also LOVE to see IPS add an outdoor school to their choice school programming.
  • Stem
  • Montessori and CSI
  • Ips 106 & other low level ranked ips schools
  • All of the above.
  • Montessori
  • Montessori, environmental/outdoor
  • Depends on where it will be located and what the families in that area desire.
  • All the above have their benefits. We do need to touch more on dual language as our country is not a single language country.
  • Montessori
  • Montessori-it is the oldest, most effective model in use in education today. I believe it should be one of the standards across the district and incorporated into all other approaches. As an alumni I also remember when our visual and performing arts and math/science models were very high performing. I think we should replicate these as well.
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori High School
  • Montessori
  • dual-language
  • Montessori
  • The combination of montessori with visual/performing arts.
  • Montessori and STEM
  • Montessori
  • Expanding 91’s Montessori model k-8 could be highly beneficial for different learning styles.
  • K-8 Montessori models for students needing a different style of learning.
  • Montessori
  • Montessori
  • Montessori high school
  • Nonpublic Team
  • STEM
  • Visual/performing arts and STEM
  • Sidener
  • High ability programming
  • IB program
  • Montessori
  • ARCHES
  • Montessori
  • Visual/performing arts
  • STEM
  • STEM
  • visual/performing arts
  • Montessori
  • STEM
  • Montessori 91
  • Expanding/replicating programs requires a lot of training for teachers to be effective – this requires a large cost. I would make a max of 4 of each type of school – ideally one for each side of Indy (north/east/south/west)
  • STEM
  • STEM
  • Montessori with K-8 Configuration
  • Replicating higher-performing programs would be nice. However, would the existing schools be able to pick the program they want to replicate or a new program?
  • Montessori
  • STEM
  • Dual language
  • Stem
  • Dual-language and visual/performing arts.
  • Montessori
  • Any of the above K-8 programs would be worthy of expansion…the decision should be based on what model best meet the needs of the children and families of the different `neighborhoods of our district. It is important to keep in mind that a good part of the success of these programs is that they are small schools, where students are known well and cared for through the K-8 continuum. 9 years in one school provides students the opportunity to be a part of a stable learning community that supports their needs and interests and involves them as a stakeholder in their education.
  • Stem, visual/performing arts
  • Dual language
  • STEM
  • Visual/performing arts
  • Visual arts
  • Expand dual language, and replicate former high school (6-12) programs that had 100% graduation rates. One such model or program has been replicated successfully in several districts across the country.
  • None. I would appreciate effort to beef up the high school programs so that there are better options for students once they graduate 8th grade from a program that makes sense for them. (Assuming there will continue to be a mix of k-6, k8, 6-8, 9-12 options.
  • Does the district have the capacity to hire and train for the replication of these programs. Saying you will replicate is much easier than actually replicating.
  • Not sure – Not a big fan of this idea- Does duplicating meaning turning more neighborhood schools into innovative or charter schools or does it mean duplicating these programs within a neighborhood school framework? Some innovative and charter schools are lining someone’s pocket. If these programs are truly for children, they will be happy to share their programs with those neighborhood schools .Teachers are not always allowed to be in the union in such schools. This could be seen as a way to weaken the Union representation. If you are looking at duplication programs not school structures then that is a different thing. I already feel like teachers as a stakeholders has not been important to this plan.
  • Any of the high demand programs that can be replicated with fidelity and integrity.
  • Dual-language!
  • STEM
  • Dual-language
  • Dual Language
  • Montessori
  • STEM
  • Dual-language
  • Montessori
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler lab
  • Montessori or Butler Lab
  • Butler lab #60 is great!
  • Butler lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler / dual language
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab, Dual-language, Montessori
  • Butler Lab, STEM, computer science & technology
  • While we have found the best fit for our children and family in Butler Lab schools, we recognize that this is not the preferred pedagogy for everyone. Rather than replicating or expanding these schools, IPS should focus on funding traditional models appropriately for those families who are looking to attend a neighborhood school rather than a magnet.
  • Dual language and Butler Lab
  • Click, butler lab, dual language, visual/performing arts
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab, Montessori, & Dual Language
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab & dual-language
  • Butler Lab (Reggio)
  • Butler Lab, dual-language
  • Relocate butler lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab (Reggio inspired)
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler lab
  • Butler Lab
  • I do not think expanding school options will be the solution to failing schools. There need to be more resources offered at failing schools to up lift them. These schools that are “high demand/high performing” are because there is parental involvement – this cannot be replicated, however in schools that are underperforming perhaps more educational/social work resources can help bolster the students at these schools. I feel the premise of making schools more equitable by expanding options is going to further leach the system/budget and would again redirect resources to expanding services/offerings to schools that are “under performing”. When the students at the Charter school that closed were offered priority in the 2nd round of lottery how many students opted for a high demand school? Perhaps Butler Lab #60 was a highly chosen school but this is probably in large part of proximity to the school that closed and economics/time of getting students to schools further away.
  • Butler Lab
  • butler lab but a single building/no trailers
  • Butler lab, dual-language, STEM. I do think REPLICATION is important (not changing the program to a K-5/6 program as I think K-8 is a large reason why many of these programs are successful). I also think it is important to see exactly what programs communities want in their neighborhood — many just want traditional schools to improve without a “new” program.
  • I don’t have enough information about the different programs to answer this question. Our family has attended the Butler Lab schools for the last few years and we have been happy with our experience.
  • Butler lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab, Montessori, and STEM
  • Butler Lab/inquiry based middle school
  • Butler lab, duel language
  • Butler lab
  • My kids thrive at Butler Lab – but it’s not a one size fits all.
  • Would like more STEM but love butler lab program as well
  • Butler Lab
  • Montessori, Butler Lab, visual/performing arts, trades
  • Montessori, Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab, dual-language, and STEM (PLEASE focus on areas where low socio-economics are located as opposed to affluent areas which have been done in the past)
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab and Visual/Performing Arts.
  • Butler Lab, however, proper training for any of these programs takes time, resources & dedication. It can’t be done quickly.
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler lab
  • CFI
  • CFI, Butler lab
  • Expand the CFI program, particularly if thinking about splitting existing CFI schools into k-5 and 6-8. The 6-8 level should have consistent learning objectives with existing CFI curriculum.
  • Replicate CFI how it currently is, K-8
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • Montessori ,butler Laban’s CFI
  • I know CFI the best, but they have expanded already.
  • Dual language, CFI, Butler Lab, and Montessori
  • CFI
  • Butler Lab or CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI schools
  • CFI
  • I’m unsure as I’m brand new to Indy and IPS. I have two children, one who is largely into creative arts and one whose talents lie in STEM, so I’m an advocate for those. We are attending a CFI school next year for the first time, but we chose that because my niece did the program in WI and loved it.
  • CFI
  • Butler lab, CFI
  • CFI, or as identified by the area in which a program would be expanded.
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, Butler Lab, Montessori
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI model, Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • CFI and Montessori
  • CFI
  • CFI, Montessori
  • CFI
  • CFI, STEM
  • CFI, Stem, dual language
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, STEM
  • CFI
  • Cfi
  • CFI but program access is not the issue.
  • CFI
  • We are currently at CFI 84 and believe it is a good school/program, therefore I would say CFI
  • All of these programs have benefits. We have loved our education in the CFI model. But moving away from the K-8 model and increasing the size of grade levels will change the model. The small community feel and size is a key aspect of what makes our school special.
  • CFI/Butter Lab
  • CFI and butler lab
  • Butler Lab/CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • No preference. As long as they are high quality programs that are well resourced with motivated teachers, I think any of them would be fine. I worry about trying to expanding the programs without appropriately trained teachers, which would make for a worse experience, even if it is a CFI or other high demand program.
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • We have been very happy with the CFI program. We know other families at different CFI schools who are also happy with it. Montessori should also be considered as it may be beneficial for students who respond better to that teaching method.
  • CFI (but only if it could be replicated well—strong leadership, qualified teachers and PARENT INVOLVEMENT WHICH IS KEY TO ANY PROGRAMS SUCCESS)
  • We moved from northern Indiana, and lived in a district that ranks top in the state (Penn Harris). Regardless of ranking, we opted to start our kids in a private school that offered Reggio/student led learning. As a mother concerned most with my children’s emotional health and facilitating an enjoyment for learning, and an occupational therapist who believes that people will improve and succeed when they feel engaged and empowered to do so, I was not interested in test scores of other students to prove the school’s worth, but more about how our children felt walking in and out of school every day. When we started to think about moving to the Indianapolis area, we explored our options. In Indianapolis proper we are, as we are all aware, surrounded by and possibly “competing” with several highly ranked districts. We chose IPS, and specifically the CFI model because it seemed to be a nice blend of what our kids have been used to and a traditional (albeit necessary) track with testing, state standards, and the hope for a neighborhood school where kids on the street all go to the same school.
  • We navigated the open seat report and snagged a spot at 84 mid year to avoid the dreaded lottery (even though we did live within priority zone). We have been happy at CFI 84 but I admit I feel uncomfortable with the disconnect with other IPS schools. I fully believe that if we invested in training for making ALL schools more student led, as the CFI model is intended to be, we would lead to the district as a WHOLE being a proud choice for current and future families and students. The idea of knowing some schools are well known in the area while others are avoided is, in my opinion, a huge problem for the district (and ultimately the city), so trying get more kids into certain (desirable) schools is NOT the answer. By doing so, the district is admitting that some schools are “better” than others and versus taking on the challenge to spread the wealth of knowledge that is available.
  • Inquiry based learning could be a part of all of our schools by sharing the resources of those educators who have successfully instituted the methodology for IPS in the past. Social services such as emotional coaching and occupational therapists should be increased to assist with teaching kids they way they need to be taught. If IPS wants to be well known, desired, and most importantly, successful in preparing our youth for the challenges of our current world, how about creating a master program centered around mental health? Imagine kids being evaluated, monitored, and provided resources or modifications for their own personal challenges as it relates to their learning in the classroom. Think, an IEP like file for mental and emotional health. Now, THAT will shake things up and put IPS on the map.
  • I propose we 1) share resources, 2) improve all schools, 3) create a master mental/emotional health program that serves student and sets the bar for other districts.
  • CFI
  • CFI (only if it’s actually replicated. This does not mean switching to a K-5 building)
  • CFI
  • Replicate means keep the same!
  • Replicate.
  • Add more K-8 CFI and Montessori schools.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI 84 has managed to consistently maintain strong academics and extracurriculars. A significant reason for this is BECAUSE it is K-8; all students are able to identify with a community in their neighborhood because it is K-8.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, Visual/Performing Arts, STEM
  • cfi
  • CFI and or Butler
  • Specifically Cfi school 2 should be kept k thru 8.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, but that’s the one I’m most familiar with
  • CFI has been a wonderful option for us and I imagine it would be great for others, but we also strongly considered the first school we matched at when our eldest was initially in the lottery – Cold Spring. It seemed like an awesome STEM option and we loved the outdoor space. I don’t know as much about the other programs.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • Ones where students can explore their interests like CFI and Montessori.
  • Cfi, dual language
  • My son went to CFI 2 K-6, and I found the program to be well rounded and beneficial to all learning styles. I have long advocated to replicate the model in more schools in the district.
  • CFI & STEM
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • I want all kids to have the wonderful opportunities that my kids have at CFI 2. Languages, full time librarians, extracurricular activities, MUSIC PROGRAMS and arts.
  • STEM, Montessori, CFI. But replicating means doing the same thing, not reconfiguring grades and eliminating proximity, it will not be the same.
  • High Ability or CFI
  • CFI and dual language
  • These attempts at finding silver bullets won’t achieve what you are looking for. Rather than thinking that CFI or Montessori, both of which are AWESOME, will solve things, realize that you could make every classroom inquiry based. But you’d have training that would be so extensive to do so, plus a requirement for vastly more resources.
  • CFI/ Dual-Language
  • CFI and possibly Montessori
  • As a CFI parent I would like to see more CFI schools it’s an amazing program that should be offered in more locations.
  • I am coming center about replicating any program too quickly. CFI took a hit when it replicated and had to seed teachers to new buildings opening. Maybe a better idea is for IPS to adopt the pedagogies that parents, students and teachers value in these programs across more district run schools.
  • Montessori seems to benefit many schools. CFI and college prep programs are good, though it feels that attracts less diverse crowds
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, Montessori, STEM
  • I am biased because I teach at the Lab school, but I think it would be a great program to expand or replicate. I also think that the CFI and Montessori schools would be great to replicate. Importantly, I think what sets these programs apart is mainly the fact that they have a high degree of teacher autonomy and student centered design. I am encouraged to create curriculum that is actually engaging for students and does not focus on test prep or random programs the district has purchased. This attracts and retains teachers, students, and families.
  • Cfi
  • CFI needs more room at current elementary schools for the growing neighborhoods. For the love of god…do not open another one in midtown. Move the middle schools to a combined school allowing more spots to the current. The East side needs some diverse programs.
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • Montessori or CFI
  • CFI
  • I think this should be tried FIRST before any other changes are made. Pick your most popular ones that consistently have too many students applying for seats available. No need to replicate ones that aren’t already fully enrolled as first choices. Any program is fine but put them in parts of the city without access. CFI at 38th/post. Lab school on west side. Etc.
  • CFI
  • Cfi, dual language
  • CFI, STEM
  • CFI
  • Cfi
  • Cfi
  • Montessori and CFI
  • CFI
  • When done well and to meet the needs of the community, replication can be a part of the solution. Butler Lab was replicated too quickly, before 60 was fully established. In that process it set both schools back. Replication should be based on the needs of the community in which you are putting the school. We also had a preforming arts at 70 that was switched to CFI. The continuous shifting and cycling of ideas in our 8 years in the district is exhausting.
  • CFI, Montessori , STEM
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • I think expanding multiple choice schools is the answer. Montessori, CFI, lab school and dual immersion.
  • Montessori, dual language, CFI
  • CFI, STEM, dual-language
  • CFI
  • CFI, Butler Lab, Montessori
  • CFI or Montessori
  • CFI
  • We think the Montessori model is great. But it would be nice if parents had options for CFI, Butler Lab and Montessori in each zone
  • CFI
  • CFI and Butler Lab were our original first and second choices, but we’ve been happy with Montessori.
  • I strongly support the expansion of the successful and sought-after choice programs. For too long, these programs have been focused in a very narrow geographic strip between downtown and the northern edge of the district. I’d love to see a CFI at School 57. However, to be done well, the process cannot be rushed. One of the reasons CFI has been so successful is that it has expanded slowly and deliberately, always liberally seeding new schools with strong faculty experienced in the concept. Just throwing out a bunch of new schools with the CFI name does not mean a replication of the existing quality. For example, School 56 is a Montessori school in name only. Most of the faculty are not trained in the method, and most of the classrooms are not equipped with the necessary materials. And the school has not been successful. It takes a year to two years of intensive work for a teacher to become fully trained in Montessori, and the training is not inexpensive. So expanding these programs is a serious and expensive proposition. I believe it’s a worthwhile investment. But the effort could backfire if pursued too quickly and without sufficient care. Another request: could we please expand the Spanish immersion program through middle school and high school? It seems unfair to offer a powerful dual-language program through grade 6, and then have nowhere for those students to go to continue the experience. Many of them are too high-functioning in Spanish (especially orally) to get much out of the Spanish offerings currently offered in the higher grades. (If there were at least Spanish options designed for native speakers, that would help.) Lawrence Township has a successful model of what Spanish immersion can look like throughout the K-12 experience, including overseas experiences in Spanishspeaking countries for high schoolers. Please be thoughtful and intentional as you proceed. Quality before quantity.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • Dual language and CFI
  • CFI
  • Both CFI and Montessori sparked my interest when I researched them further.
  • CFI
  • CFI84
  • Cfi, stem
  • CFI
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • The CFI and Butler Lab models seem to be thriving and worth replicating.
  • CFI. I’ve been absolutely floored with how positive this method of learning has been for my kids and for their friends.
  • Cfi
  • CFI and STEM
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • I feel like the programs which are the most sought after spots should be the most replicated. My child attends CFI and I think the IB program is amazing and should most definitely be replicated, but I know that it’s a different training for teachers and can take some time to get a new school going.
  • I feel like the CFI program is at capacity and at risk of being watered down with 4 campuses, however the other programs only have 1-2 campuses and should be in consideration for replication. Parents like non-traditional education approaches that help to build beyond academics that will prepare their child towards a role in the global community.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • CFI has been good for us. Would love to see even more emphasis on STEM.
  • Cfi
  • CFI – as a CFI parent of a soon to be 8th grade, I believe the IB model is producing well educated, caring, global thinking problem solvers!
  • CFI
  • CFI, dual-language, STEM
  • CFI, Butler Lab, dual-language, Montessori
  • CFI
  • I don’t have a specific desire. I actually just moved my child out of a CFI school because I didn’t think it was performing all that well. All schools must have a plan to address varying levels of ability within a school/classroom or the education of everyone will suffer.
  • CFI
  • CFI and Montessori
  • CFI, dual-language
  • While we love our CFI model, expansion has already been done several times.
  • Montessori and CFI
  • CFI is very popular in our area and hard to get seats in.
  • I think all intentionally-programmed schools have valuable and unique approaches. We have been both a Butler Lab and CFI family and have found both exceptional. If asked to select one, I would say CFI for its well-rounded and whole-student curriculum.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, Butler Lab, and Montessori
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, STEM
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • We’re currently at a CFI school and love it. I love the IB program. I’m sure many of the other programs are amazing as well!
  • CFI, Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • CFI; dual language
  • CFI, but only bc that is what I know!
  • CFI
  • I have two kids at a CFI school, and we have been happy with it. I think more Montessori schools would be a nice option as well.
  • Replicate CFI program
  • My children are currently in a CFI school, and it would be great to see this replicated in areas outside of the middle of the city, and more into our neighborhood or neglected neighborhoods. I think any of the high-performing models should be replicated. I would love to see more options for STEM, dual-language, Montessori, arts, etc.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, STEM
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • Butler lab or cfi
  • CFI
  • Butler lab, CFI
  • CFI
  • Cfi,Montessori and any other highly sought after programs
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, dual-language
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • We are a CFI family, but I think this question would be better answered by parents still seeking a school. Prior to enrollment, we were interested in a variety of options and our CFI placement was the result of the lottery. We would’ve been pleased with other placement as well, but a CFI was our first choice.
  • CFI
  • CFI, Dual-language, Montessori
  • CFI, Montessori
  • CfI, butler lab
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • Montessori- or CFI- but replication will not work without increased support for lower SES students (school psych PhD here)
  • CFI, Montessori, STEM
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • Cfi and butler lab
  • It seems that the most wanted are CFI, Lab, Montessori- I also think more dual language opportunities would be great
  • CFI
  • My child attends a CFI. I love the programming! I’ve thought for a long time that if we could make those programs more accessible by replicating them our district would be in a better. The Butler Lab schools are also amazing, even for our behavior kids.
  • I only have experience with CFI, but the model was extremely appealing when determining school plans for our oldest son. Our experience has reinforced that appeal. During the pandemic, many aspects of the CFI model were altered or prohibited and the impact of even those smaller changes (group work, sitting in clusters, hands on activities) had a very negative impact.
  • The CFI K-8 school is why my student is in IPS. If that program went away or changed to a K-5/6-8, then I would strongly consider taking my student out of IPS. It will no longer be a unique and alternative community. I could put my student anywhere for that type of program.
  • CFI, Montessori, dual language
  • CFI
  • CFI or Montessori
  • CFI
  • High Ability Magnet, CFI, STEM, dual-language, Butler Lab
  • Cfi
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, STEM,
  • I am not sure that programming is necessarily the solution. What seems consistent among all of these programs is a the smaller community k-8 school. My children attend a CFI school and I am engaged and committed to that program for my children, but can’t assume that is the best learning strategy for all students.
  • CFI
  • CFI, Butler, STEM
  • CFI and performing arts
  • CFI, Butler Lab
  • CFI, dual language and Montessori
  • As the parent of a CFI student, I would be opposed to expanding class size at current CFI schools as I believe the student-to-teacher ratio is a strong draw. Within CFI, it would be great to see a bigger focus on STEM and emerging technologies (computer science, machine learning, etc.)
  • CFI
  • Butler lab and cfi
  • Montessori and CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI or Montessori
  • We are sending our student to school 84, which is a CFI school. Every parent I know who sends their student to a CFI school is happy with the program, so I would be in favor of replicating more CFI schools.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • CFI, STEM
  • CFI
  • Whatever programs work for the most kids. Avoid the more specialized. Families need stronger neighborhood schools. Seems like CFI & Butler Lab have strongest reputations and more generalist than the others.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI, visual/performing arts, dual language
  • I hear great things about CFI & Butler Lab. I do think high-ability, structured programs are beneficial as well. I think career focused (even at a young age) is important so students know that not everyone requires a standard 4-year college degree. Hands on programs & interest for future careers is important.
  • Butler Lab and/or CFI
  • Whichever create the best opportunities for student success. My four kids have all been CFI students and that program has worked well for 3/4 of them. I think CFIs are popular with parents but that model is not right for every student. Having options is important. I also think it’s important to look at which school models have worked for kids who whose demographics are more like the demographics of the district as a whole. Kids who live near #84, for instance, would maybe do well at almost any school. They have a lot of advantages to start with. So, priority should be for replicating schools that well serve the kiddos they would be serving.
  • I tutor students from CFI schools that are not being taught how to read in the classroom using scientifically researched methods. I would support classroom wide instruction of reading before replicating programs that are not serving all of the students. If the data shows a program is successful for all students not just a few in a school, community opinions should not influence this decision. Follow the data.
  • CFI, butler lab, Stem
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • Montessori and CFi
  • CFI
  • cfi butler lab
  • CFI, Butler Lab, Montessori, Visual/Performing Arts, and Stem
  • I don’t have experience with many but as long as CFI curriculum could be implemented in middle school without sacrificing quality of teaching to multiple ability levels, I think the Inquiry-based model is a good one.
  • CFI
  • CFI, Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • CFI and Butler Lab
  • CFI & Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • It doesn’t matter but I go to CFI so I like that one. It seems popular.
  • CFI
  • All honestly but CFI and Butler Lab most.
  • CFI & performing arts
  • CFI and STEM
  • I would like to see a CFI or Butler Lab school on the east side.
  • CFI, butler lab, stem
  • Stem and CFI
  • Montessori/CFI/Sidener Academy
  • CFI
  • CFI; STEM; visual/performing arts
  • CFI
  • CFI, dual-language, and montessori
  • I would be interested in seeing additional CFI options as well as Montessori and visual/performing arts. I feel we have a lot of STEM options already and many of our students lack access to the arts.
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • dual-language and CFI
  • CFI Ans Montessori schools would be great to expand, but data shows putting everyone in 6-8 for middle school won’t be good for IPS students. We will lose a lot of solid families that provide great test scores for our district.
  • Cfi
  • CFI would be my option based on test results and popularity of community.
  • CFI
  • Butler lab, CFI, Montessori. But those schools must be given resources to replicate successfully, as well as freedom to teach in their styles, and not be mandated with district curriculum that does not follow their programs.
  • CFI/International Baccalaureate
  • I think we’ve already been expanding CFI and Butler Lab schools and it’s put a strain on those schools as they expand. I’ve been apart if CFI 2 and 27 early on and now Butler Lab 60 and 55, and I can say that things are not as strong or smooth as the original schools. I’d be hesitant to continue expanding schools before the already established ones get their feet under them.
  • Cfi, Butler lab, Montessori
  • Montessori , then CFI. One of the reasons they are in high demand is because they ARE k-8 programs.
  • CFI, Butler Lab
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI
  • CFI or visual performing arts
  • Butler Lab and CFI
  • CFI, Butler Lab, dual-language
  • Butler Lab
  • Take a survey of the area and explore the desire/needs of the community involved.
  • Montessori, dual-language
  • Butler Lab
  • Butler Lab
  • Montessori

Another potential solution raised is to address grade configuration. This would mean the district transitioning to K-5 buildings, 6-8 buildings and high schools (9-12). Doing this would align IPS with surrounding districts in supporting an elementary and middle school specific model.

What is one benefit to realigning the grades?

  • More room for students. I know our school is packed to the gills. If it were just prek to 5,!there would be more room for students.
  • Grades 6-8 (the preteen aka puberty years) is prepping young students for HS.
  • I see no benefit.
  • This alignment has been tried in the past by IPS. But it was abandoned because children do better in a K-8 continuity education environment. No benefits with realignment.
  • Similarity to other school districts
  • There is no benefit to realigning the grades when you are talking about Montessori curriculum.
  • I see no benefit actually
  • I cannot see one now.
  • Better prepare kids for high school.
  • Don’t know
  • Consistency
  • I do not see a benefit
  • I feel this is a great solution alignment with the surrounding districts and because I feel the 6th grade in a 6-8 building is a better fit for our students as they are preparing for middle school and still need to be separated from the high school students. I also feel this break down is great and helps keep children in a school community where they can grow and stay safe.
  • Better transition between grades
  • Putting all student on the same curriculum.
  • Middle schools programs would be able to meet the specific needs of secondary students. Currently our k-8 buildings sacrifice too much programmatically to accommodate both sets of students in the same space.
  • No. Realigning grades is a bad idea. A ips middle school would be a terrible idea. The k-8 is what makes ips attractive to lots of families.
  • Separating the younger children from middle grade is safe in these days we’re living in.
  • Utilizing space.
  • None. Very much against this idea.
  • I prefer my young kids to have a chance to have elementary without being around kids who are far advanced in terms of puberty. It’s familiar to me and seems less spread thin in terms of accommodation.
  • None. We like that CFI 2 is K-8
  • More kids per grade allows for more seats in those grades in those schools. Increases building utilization. Encourages availably of extra curricular activities by having a higher density of similar age students
  • No benefit
  • Specialized teacher who can touch many, if not all, students in the school.
  • Hopefully less kids in a building
  • None that I can see at the moment. Would be hard on all communities who have older siblings caring for young family members.
  • Potentially expanding access to popular programs.
  • I don’t see any benefit and believe many families choose a K-8 school because of the benefits of having siblings together. Plus I feel the middle school aged children benefit from having younger kids in the building. I believe it helps keep them in line and potentially dissuades them from “teenage” type behavior.
  • I can’t think of a single one.
  • Align with surrounding districts
  • It’s familiar because it is how I grew up. But I wouldn’t recommend it. Middle school represents some of my most difficult memories.
  • better sports and performing arts, orchestra. more stratified according to ability
  • Please don’t do it. We like our school k-8 and would like to keep our children at the same school.
  • Each lower, middle and upper schools would have the ability to become more concentrated in their grade groups. This includes extracurricular activities, sports, Clubs, etc.
  • I don’t like this at all! We want it to stay as is.
  • I don’t like this at all! We want it to stay as is.
  • The benefit to the non-teaching personnel is that realigning avoids eliminating superfluous positions that currently drain desperately needed resources from classrooms, teachers, and the students we serve.
  • It would keep the age ranges in better aliment.
  • The teachers that teach specials such as art/Spanish can focus on one level vs two
  • IPS’ current stand alone middle schools are not offering what the k-8/2-8 schools do, so I do not have faith that breaking apart successful schools will result in more positive experiences for students overall. This seems to be only about cost savings and closing buildings and not actually improving the quality of schools for all students in the district. If it were, then the focus would be on improving schools across the district rather than dismantling schools that are providing excellent educations to students and are the heart of our communities.
  • There are a multitude of reason why I believe this is an appropriate transition that is critical for the success of our students. These grade configurations would support appropriate peer to peer interactions and foster an age appropriate experience inside each building. Our “middle schoolers” in K-8 buildings are at a complete disservice and we are setting them up for failure as they are thrown into high school with no transition of educational experience. Our 6-8th graders have to be walked everywhere in our building by an adult (gaining to skills of independence), they have to wait outside bathrooms if younger students are using them, and do not get to experience any traditional programs like band, orchestra, choir, and other extra-curricular classes. I could not be more excited for the prospect of these changes.
  • I believe this is the best configuration: K-6, 7-8 and 9-12.
  • It would make all of IPS the same.
  • Less kids all in one school, making smaller class sizes hopefully.
  • It would align with the other districts.
  • I have seen both ways be productive.
  • Curriculum alignments occur more frequency at the K-5 level and 6-8 level
  • not sure
  • Middle school needs their own space, teachers that know MS kids
  • Sports
  • It would be nice if all schools followed the same configuration. It can get confusing to have K-6 and K-8 buildings and is hard to explain to parents. It would also help if students move throughout the district to not have to adjust as much.
  • None.
  • One benefit to realigning is the decrease in older student older student interactions and hopefully more focus on their needs of the age group
  • I really don’t see a benefit. There is scientific evidence to support the K-8 model. Older students have the opportunity to be leaders/mentors earlier and for longer periods of time. 6-8 students benefit from remaining in a safe comfortable environment at a time in their development that is difficult emotionally and physically. They are then more prepared for the high school environment. A district-wide K-8 realignment would be a choice that is in the best interest of all IPS students. And, a district that is willing to make a decision based on the best possible outcome for their students, regardless of what neighboring districts are doing, should be the norm.
  • Easier transition to HS. More in line with neighboring districts
  • I don’t see it, the k-5 or k-8 have been more successful. The 6-8 model for IPS has been a disaster.
  • Safety/Security for younger students being in same space as older ones.
  • More resources centralized for students, specifically programming in middle school.
  • A focus on middle school. I was at a CFI and due to age; behavior problems start to surface and be more impactful in middle school. I think schools need to be specifically middle school focused to deal and focus on middle school issues. It’s an integral and often difficult age for many children.
  • Not only will we be able to focus on academics, but develop age appropriate programs designed to tandem child development & learning stages. I also believe that the district should implement Jr. High Schools – grades 7-9, or implement freshmen academies. 9th graders are just not ready for high school, need more transitional time and training. Too much Too soon.
  • Safety. Keeping groups of students who may be relatively close in their physical and emotional progression together has an opportunity to create a safer learning environment.
  • I can see how it would benefit this district administration. Under other circumstances I would agree it is generally better for youth as well.
  • Middle and high schools could be designated innovation schools, allowing children access to these curriculum longer while in IPS. Student retention in HS aged children is lower due to the lack of diverse curriculums, that many of our children learn throughout their earlier years.
  • I’m opposed to re-aligning the grades.
  • More focused teachers and administrators
  • I don’t know. It seems like a lot of disruption.
  • To give students the experience of a school transition prior to entering high school.
  • You’d separate out the middle school kids so they can go be punks together and not be such bullies to the little kids.
  • Provide better, developmentally appropriate school experiences to middle school students
  • NO Benefit – This is a terrible idea! Please don’t do this!
  • Not in favor
  • Not in favor
  • Historically, test scores are better in K-5, so they are not affected by the rigor and transitions of middle school.
  • SEL needs are very different for grades K-5 than they are for kids in 6-8. More focus could be placed on grade-level appropriate SEL. 2) If IPS continues with the Charter/lottery model, blending those kids with the “regular” school kids may help those kids who weren’t fortunate enough to get a lottery spot.
  • If it would really help with equity, that would be a benefit.
  • One benefit would be the possibility of siblings staying together. Another would be schools may be able to reach their seat capacities.
  • Consistency across the district and aligning with other districts seems to be the only benefit. It is not a sure thing that realigning the grades across the district would have any real educational benefit. Diversity of choice is one of the strengths of IPS, including differences in grade configurations.
  • keeping the bigger kids(6) away from the younger children
  • peer socialization
  • 6-8 kids get an environment set up specifically for there social emoti0nal and academic needs. Staff that is trained and committed to this age level of students.
  • While K-8 buildings give 7th and 8th graders a more intimate experience, closer to home, closer to younger siblings, and in a smaller less intimidating surroundings, I believe 7th and 8th graders miss out on a “true” middle school experience. Since middle school is a time for students to prepare for high school. 7th and 8th grade students would benefit from having opportunities that prepare them better. The opportunity to take a more diverse class schedule (band, choir, specialized art classes, or high school subjects for high school credit – like foreign language, algebra, biology). They would also be in a larger building that is similar to a high school experience.
  • More standardized with outside districts
  • It would be nice to be streamlined with other districts and offer more access to choice programs for higher grade levels.
  • I don’t know.
  • Giving kids the real “middle school” experience by allowing them an in-between stop before high school.
  • You are allowing the 6th graders to start learning the basics of what they will need as far as structure how to rotate classes and ultimately preparing them for high school.
  • One benefit of realigning the schools would be to prepare students for the next phase of their education. Particularly middle school students. Middle school students take longer to make the transition from Elementary school such as changing classes, working with diverse groups of students and faculty, more responsibility for tasks, themselves and following different flow of activities and different paces. Some students in MS may need more time to grasp some of the skills. If they are in the MS environment for a longer period of time, there would be no need to keep a student to repeat a grade.
  • 6-8 distribute the load
  • More access to early elementary schools that are high performing
  • Sending students to a different building in 6th grade would allow them the opportunity to meet new teachers, new students, and the experience of transitioning to a new building and environment.
  • Decreases parents concerns about younger students being exposed to inappropriate behavior
  • Middle schoolers have very specific needs, it’s a very specific time in life and learning. I fully support creating buildings filled with educators and staff who love middle schoolers, with all their challenges and rewards. I also fully support middle schools as I think going from an 8th grade class of 40-50 kids to a huge high school is too much.
  • None. I believe the K-8 is the best answer
  • None. This will damage existing schools and communities
  • I don’t see the benefit. I like the continuity and community of K-8.
  • All schools would be similar and easier to transition to next school new with everyone else
  • More focused curriculum for relevant age groups
  • None. This will damage existing schools and communities
  • I can’t think of any – I’m absolutely against this.
  • None
  • Students would be able to meet new grade level peers, but being a part of a k-8 school already, I as a parent and my incoming 6th grade don’t want this option.
  • Prek programs at all elementary schools?
  • None. It would take away from schools that have built a strong community and safe space for their kids including relationships that push for growth, success, and trust.
  • I like the k to 8 option
  • I don’t see any benefit to doing this, especially for families with multiple children and without access to busing.
  • I see no benefit of realignment.
  • Middle school students should be separate from elementary, expected to perform at a higher maturity than elementary students
  • None. It would be devastating to do away with the K-8 model.
  • More course offerings- however I would like to hear more about what the options being considered are .
  • Making more space for younger students in popular elementary schools.
  • More focused resources based on grade levels
  • I honestly can’t think of one.
  • Less crowded schools (easier drop-off and pickup)
  • I’m not particularly in favor of this option and don’t think it offers much merit other than possibly helping with space and funding issues.
  • There is no benefit. If IPS had any organizational capabilities at all perhaps more extracurricular activities could be offered but IPS has no capabilities to do that (just look at the high schools as an example)
  • Allows more students to access school specific programs already available
  • Smaller class sizes, More schools being opened to accommodate this adjustment
  • Giving middle schoolers a feeling of progression. Moving on to middle school is a rite of passage.
  • More resources/options/support for extracurricular activities
  • More access to higher level classes and specials in middle school
  • I prefer the community of more grades together/neighborhoods stay together
  • Enhanced middle school experience with more curricular and extra curricular options; increased integration of students across communities
  • I can’t think of one.
  • Less crowding perhaps.
  • I don’t see any benefit. Aligning with other school districts is not a reason.
  • Teacher: student ratios
  • I went to school with the elementary/middle school model (K-5/6-8) and it seemed to work well. So, from my personal perspective, the benefit is that it aligns with my experience. Not saying much, but it is something
  • Possibly better focused learning.
  • students in buildings other than PreK/K-5 would have a true middle school experience. Possibility of more sports, activities, clubs…
  • kids feel special but also more cohesive being near similar ages/grades
  • NONE – separating middle school students is a disaster
  • A benefit would be not having 8th graders in the same building with Kindergartners. As I have witnessed at our IPS school, middle schoolers running through hallways being loud, rambunctious, swearing, etc. That’s a middle schooler. They should be allowed to be who they are. Having 5 & 6 yo kids witnessing that? No thanks. BUT, having middle school IN elementary schools could be super advantageous. Middle schoolers could be given more leadership roles within the school, mentor the younger kids, work with them on projects. I wish our school did more of that.
  • If a school is not performing well in its existing model, I think iteration and change makes complete sense. If a school is doing well, I do not think there is a benefit.
  • I don’t see any
  • I do not think that reconfiguring the grade levels across the board is a fit for many of the choice programs. Many parents choose IPS schools for their children BECAUSE of the fact that they offer a K-8 model in the same building. I would strongly consider pulling my children out of their IPS choice program if the building transitioned away from being K-8. Multiple options for educational methods and building configurations is one of the primary reasons parents CHOOSE and KEEP children in IPS.
  • None for the children- they benefit from being together, leading and modeling the way.
  • More extra-curricular options for 6-8. More streamlined focus on facilities for middle grades.
  • Ideally better facilities and more robust extracurriculars.
  • I can see how it will probably save the district money.
  • None
  • Consistency
  • I don’t see any because the middle schools will not be segmented into Montessori, Reggio, IB, etc. The middle schools grades at choice schools are successful because of the school and that school community. IPS will be setting up the students for failure to enter high school.
  • If it means more efficiently used resources that can be spent closer to the children who need them, that would be a big benefit.
  • nothing – I think the younger kids benefit from seeing the older kids in their schools. The montessori method is built upon community learning and it would be reduced by realigning the grades.
  • To keep the kids within age appropriate environments.
  • literally not a single benefit
  • I don’t believe there is a benefit. The best performing schools at the moment are the K8 schools. Why should they be changed?
  • Equity
  • I’m not sure but I’d imagine that realigning the grades could offer more opportunities for electives/specialized extra curricular experiences if middle schools were able to share staff and resources.
  • Separation of age groups.
  • We are already in this model at #74 but it’s so disappointing there is not an immersion school option for middle and high school
  • Don’t change a thing
  • This is could allow for more academic differentiation for high achievers.
  • As of now, I do not see any benefits to realigning the grades. I think even the word “realigning” is unfair given it’s making IPS out of balance/alignment instead of just having a different structure. I do not understand why the district needs to have the same structure of other surrounding districts. In the past survey, it was mentioned along with the building utilization but that just seems to commoditize kids instead of serving kids. I mean, doesn’t it make more sense to provide kids continuation of staff/teachers they know. If you want to give more resource to 6-8 grades, why not provide more resources in the current setting? Why do they have to be taken out of what they know and be put into a whole new structure? Anyhow, I do not see any benefit to changing up the grade structure.
  • Clear benefits in student experience and the ability for a smaller school feel.
  • Research is pretty clear that there is not a benefit to students for this proposal.
  • I am honestly having a tough time thinking of one. Perhaps for those that want more of a big school experience for their kids, a larger middle school could offer lots of sports or something along those lines.
  • It would benefit some schools.
  • Cannot see a benefit to this solution
  • Allowing more classrooms per grade in choice schools
  • No thanks
  • Not to have 5yr old in with 13yr olds
  • I feel separating elementary and middle school is a great idea . It separates age levels , maturity levels and would probably be easier on staff
  • More space to allow more students would probably mean meeting your budget requirements.
  • I don’t there are any benefits, I went through a school system like this and I think it isolates the students too much.
  • Less exposure by younger kids to too mature behavior and language
  • I agree with the configuring of grades 9-12, but not the other grade changes.
  • Safety! Teenagers do not need to be in the same building as kindergarteners.
  • I see no benefit. And this is coming from an educator who worked in a middle school building in HSE.
  • More elementary student access to smaller school programs that have limited spots
  • I have no interest in realigning the grades.
  • Consistency across the district.
  • I don’t see much benefit considering the research on this topic. Prevailing research shows that k-8 schools are very beneficial for middle school student development.
  • Athletics
  • I do not think this would be a good idea. One reason we chose IPS was to build a community starting at K all the way through 8th. middle school can be rough: bullying, hormonal changes, peer pressure etc. I do not know benefits of separating the grades.
  • There is no benefit to doing this. Surrounding districts do not have better test scores because of this model.
  • Specifically, as a Montessori parent, it should remain K-8.
  • I can’t think of a good reason.
  • I honestly don’t know. One of the main reasons we chose cfi2 is that it is k-8. Please keep some k-8 schools!
  • It would keep the facilities planning people busy trying to figure out how to reorganize existing schools into K-5, 6-8, and high schools
  • Uniformity/equality across the district
  • None
  • Not sure
  • Potential for more sports/extras
  • It is similar to other school districts / townships.
  • I really don’t understand why you keep going back and forth so much. Change is good and sometimes not.
  • Create stronger foundation for students as they transition
  • Create stronger foundation for students as they transition
  • none
  • Can’t think of one
  • There are few benefits—theoretically more room is created in desired elementary schools. But many of those schools are desired because they are K-8.
  • Potentially using existing K-8 buildings to house more K-5 students.
  • None. The current alignment works well for families w mixed ages and provides continuity for children.
  • I see no benefit at this time. It would make children go through more transitions when stability is what children need most. Parents want the K through 8 model so that they can remain in one building and feel a strong sense of belonging and community. The K to 8 models that exist now work and changing them seems counterproductive.
  • Smaller number of students in building
  • Sixth graders would have 3 years in the same building instead of just two before another transition.
  • I don’t see a benefit. I think it would be tearing apart half the program that is so desirable, the very programs that should be replicated.
  • I do not see any benefit from the personal experiences of my three children (now in 7th, 9th, and 11th grade) both at IPS 91 Montessori and Sidener.
  • I don’t believe there is one. You stated you wanted to replicate high performing schools. One of the reasons these schools are high performing is due to the multiple age ranges of children. The Montessori method has various ages in the same class. Splitting these grades will impact how this method is organized and will impact the children a growth.
  • It could give older kids a more mature environment to prepare for transitioning to high School, but that all depends on execution, and if it’s done in a way that keeps the K-5 kids in the district, continues the same teaching methodology and quality if education.
  • I see no benefits in this solution
  • To get acclimated to a schedule more like high school however students should be starting in 6th grade not just put in 7th and especially not 8th in the middle of middle school experience. Should be phased in
  • I believe that all schools should be k-8. All or many of the choice schools are this model.
  • N/A
  • Unsure
  • Not supportive of this change.
  • I can understand that numbers wise, it probably makes sense to have middle school buildings include 6th graders. (And I recognize that numbers equates with funding.)
  • Not really seeing the benefits yet, especially for the charter schools that are part of specific curriculums.
  • None
  • None.
  • I do not see a benefit to realigning the grades.
  • I would imagine that realigning grades might save money; however, specific proposals/building options/ ideas for which schools or teaching pedagogies would coalesce into middle schools have not been articulated to truly be able to evaluate this option or whether realigning would be a financial savings.
  • No benefit of realigning the grades
  • Prefer my child’s current setting K-8
  • I think the benefit is right now there is no 7-8 dual language program that I know of so it would be very wonderful to see a dual language middle school! I am very excited about this prospect for my 2nd grader! also I know some schools are crowded like k-8 so it would give the k-5 more room if 6-8 moved out.
  • I would rather see a Montessori option for Pre-K through Grade 12. The Montessori elementary schools from all over the district could all combine after leaving the current Pre-K -6th buildings for 7th-12th in one building centrally located. The facility could be supported by combining the Purdue Polytechnic and/or Herron (as examples) with the Montessori students to share the facility.
  • Saving money
  • I see no benefit; I prefer the current configuration.
  • I don’t want separate middle schools! I hated this growing up and I’m not sure how it would even work for Sidener?? 2-5 what! Also what’s the point with Herron prep. I don’t know any parents that want this change.
  • Consistency across the district
  • There is no student based benefit.
  • I see no benefit to reconfiguration for our school, district families (who would be more likely to have children split across multiple schools), or for students- international educational research and outcomes does not support this as a best practice
  • I honestly don’t know. Our school is k-8 and I went to a similar model as a child. I like that the younger children get to see the older kids through out the day. And I think it gives the older kids a sense of responsibility to know the younger kids are looking up to them.
  • I do not believe there is a benefit to realigning the grades.
  • NONE! We just got a K-8 settled In IPS relatively recently. Many of us who have been with the district for years learned over and over again that the middle school model was not working. It feels somewhat tone deaf and Disrespectful to do this to students again. There is so much data that students are safer and learn more in K-8 environments. We literally moved to be close to K-8 school and we love it so very much. Changing this is going to uproot a lot of wonderful things that the K-8 environments have built
  • With this option, I would hope IPS would be able to offer high-level courses to all students in 8th grade (Biology, Trig, etc.) currently, those courses are only offered at Sidener, I believe.
  • I would expect our MS teachers/teams to be strong, if this plan is implemented in a way that fosters safety, inclusivity, community, and academic rigor.
  • Keeping kids in contact with those in their age groups
  • Not sure
  • Less bullying and less kids being exposed to things they are not yet ready for. Would help major in the learning department as well because kids will less likely want to follow older peers if not seeing the actions being performed. Will slow a lot of violence as well. Less siblings in same schools and will allow children to think for themselves and actually go to school for the right reasons.
  • More physical space in current k-8 buildings.
  • No benefit
  • Expansion of extra curricular options for middle school
  • Continuity across district
  • The realigning give the opportunity to focus more on age groups and help students have a better opportunity to engage more with peers. It also offers less influences from older students that younger students don’t need to be a part of.
  • It may help with better building usage?
  • There is not one for our family personally. I am sure there is a cost savings for the district.
  • Providing more developmentally appropriate resources and trained staff in each building
  • Advanced students can be exposed to higher learning and mentored by more advanced students
  • Being the same, if that is a goal.
  • Would not be good for Montessori model
  • I don’t see any benefits to doing this for students, teachers or families. Perhaps it’s more efficient for the district and administrators.
  • smaller schools
  • No benefit for neighborhood style schools
  • I guess more middle school experience for older kids
  • More classes per grade when schools close and kids have no where else to go.
  • I do not see a benefit
  • None. Do not want to reconfigure k- 8 for elementary.
  • I see now this may benefit some schools who need rebuilding, however, I do NOT agree with realigning everyone the same way.
  • The only benefit for alignment is helping schools who need improvement. However, this has NO BENEFIT if you dismantle models who currently work & who offer a working model to diverse groups of students, which is part of your mission in rebuilding. Why dismantle models who are performing currently to your mission statement?
  • I don’t see any. This structure was attempted before by the district and it didn’t work then, hence why we have k-8 schools. Our school is thriving with this model and it’s why many families choose IPS over other options, because they get to be part of a school community for 9+ years and build rich relationships. So again, I see no benefits from grade configuration. Families will, without a doubt, pull out of the district because they won’t trust these new stand alone middle schools will be done well as they were unsuccessful in the past.
  • I honestly don’t see a benefit. When I was an IPS student the grades were separated into k-6, 7&8 and 9-12. I absolutely hated having to switch schools. When I heard the changes years ago I love the idea of only having 2 schools especially with the Montessori approach where the older children help/model for the younger kids.
  • I do not support this because I have seen the tight community and well-rounded students that have come from the #91 K-8 model.
  • Not involved with public schools
  • …to be in alignment with surrounding districts while concentrating academic focus.
  • None.
  • I agree with realigning the grades just not at Sidener or the specialty schools
  • Wider variety of Extracurriculars offerings could likely be offered at larger K-5 or 6-8 schools.
  • It’s better not to mix 6-8th graders with K-5. Some kids going through puberty and similar things in life won’t respond well with little children around. I don’t like my small children thinking they are 13-14 year olds when they are not since they are more to fall to influences .
  • Age related in skill performance
  • KDG wouldn’t have to be in the same building with middle schoolers. The age differences and behaviors are drastically different. It would also allow middle schoolers to have a true middle school experience and not be part of the elementary set up.
  • Separate different age groups so they aren’t exposed to so many safety and at-risk factors.
  • Back to basics. True middle school experiences.
  • Safer buildings and campuses
  • consistency
  • More access to the middle school opportunities for students currently in k-8 programming
  • Reducing the number of different grade levels would make it easier to have the needed supplies, (appropriate desk and chairs, curriculum, etc.) It would give middle schools more equity in sports, programs, and a wider variety of class options. I am at a k-8 building and rules, routines, procedures need to be vastly different for a kindergartener to an 8th grader. Middle schoolers need to be allowed to become more independent that means the whole structure of procedures (from lunch to walking in the hall) needs to be different than younger grades. We are trying to fit them in a metaphorical box that is too small for them. That leads me to talk about classrooms. Elementary building classrooms were build with little kids in mind. Often times the square footage in an elementary classrooms is not big enough for older kids to comfortably fit in a feel like that have space to move. This leads to students feeling anxious and can negatively effect behavior.
  • Saving money
  • Making traditional middle schools makes sense and it is probably wise to get them away from kindergarten
  • Don’t do it
  • HUGE Benefit to specializing programs for the different grade levels, having more teachers per grade level for planning/sharing ideas. A lot of K-8 building have a huge disconnect between the elementary and middle schools anyways and there are problems with how loud the middle schools are during passing periods (which wouldn’t be a problem in a middle school where everyone is passing at the same time). Would be great to open a CFI middle school and then we could have more classrooms per grade level for K-5 (which would expand openings for these grade levels)
  • N/A
  • A greater ability to focus on the specific academic and SEL needs of that age group
  • sameness
  • I believe moving grade 6 with the other middle grades would be beneficial. I would also think about grouping 5-6 together and 7-8 with a K-4 model. Also think about moving preschool and kindergarten together.
  • I truly don’t see one.
  • I work at a k-8 school, it is not right for the little kids to go to school with the middle schoolers. The middle school is ran where the kids can go to the lockers, the little kids are around that where the middle schoolers are cursing and setting bad examples.
  • I personally believe we should have K-4 elementary schools, so moving to K-5 is a step in the right direction. Sixth graders know too much and are just too grown to be in the same building as kindergarteners and first graders.
  • Middle school scores for ilearn would not factored into elementary school scores
  • It would beneficial for tracking and leveraging data to assess growth for middle school students as there would be one central locations/group responsible for this task.
  • More concentrated age & development range in one building.
  • It saves the district money in a tight fiscal environment.
  • Student’s social and emotional support would be better suited for their maturity level
  • 6th grades should not be the oldest in the building
  • The age of scholars would be more developmentally appropriate. Students in grade 6 will have more opportunities in middle school than in elementary school.
  • Smaller class sizes
  • I think 6th graders are ready for middle school and too old and influential to k-5 and I think k-5 would be great for elementary.
  • You can standardize everything taught and how taught in district
  • None. There are far more behavior issues, less opportunities for participation in sports, less ability to get to know students as the age up. In addition, being a 6th grade teacher at a Montessori school with a second job—I will likely quit teaching altogether. The instability is incredibly draining, frustrating, and maddening. I left a job in Perry township middle school to move to a k-8 building to teach 6th grade simply for the fact that there is more ability to get to know my students, less behavior issues because students already have relationships. Instead of focusing on changing what is working— work to create solid high school programs (ie Broad Ripple arts and humanities magnet) that will keep parents in district after middle school.
  • More space in elementary buildings I suppose.
  • As a teacher who works in a K-8 building ,I see the 6-8 buildings a s a huge plus. It has been hard to meet the needs of middle schoolers and kindergarteners in the same building. The sixth grade have had to eat lunch with the kindergartners. Thus our kindergartners were exposed to several poor decisions made by our middle schoolers. Middle school students have not been given the opportunity for sports, special classes, and higher level math that my own children were given in their middle school in Pike Township.
  • consistency across buildings and their uses
  • Unsure – not one I can see
  • Traditional
  • I don’t know enough to contribute to this. Maybe, 6th graders get the chance to be informally mentored by 7th and 8th graders? Might that help with higher behavioral and academic expectations and performance?
  • Middle school grades could be more ready to go into a high school setting
  • Togetherness
  • Better focused academic and extra curricular for the specific age groups
  • K-8
  • K-5
  • Nothing
  • Zero benefits
  • More room in the building to expand curriculum and extra curricular offerings to students
  • Shared resources targeted for age specific groups
  • I don’t think it’s beneficial
  • Organizing locations to support the consolidated needs of student body
  • I see no benefit.
  • There is no benefit. We chose IPS over Washington Twp specifically for the combined K8. IPS will lose families over this.
  • Better athletic/extracurricular options
  • Consistency in community building and educational growth
  • Elementary, middle school, and high schools would each have more space; as well as better focus on the different periods of their education/age group. Especially for middle school, which needs more space for expanding activities. Space for clubs and sports programs. Instead of being crammed into buildings better suited for elementary students. This may also provide more appropriate environments for each age group.
  • Grouping kids by like age-group allows schools to better address the children’s needs. It could mitigate problem behaviors.
  • More resources availability – theater, activities, sports
  • I do not see a benefit to this model.
  • None
  • None, from a parent prospective. We do not want to change grade configuration and do not see this improving overall performance within IPS. This is a cost saving measure that will hurt student performance and will likely push many families out of IPS and to private or surrounding public schools.
  • Sports
  • None
  • None. Aligning with other districts is not a benefit. IPS is unique and should embrace that fact.
  • None
  • Narrows the range of needs that must be addressed by a particular school building.
  • Resources better tuned to student need
  • None
  • I think with the era our kids are growing up in having smaller schools k-8 is better for mental health, self esteem and continuity ESPECIALLY in the middle school grades. I think one of the reasons some schools are highly sought after is because of this model rather than kids being shuffled off into a middle school once they hit 6th grade. I went to a traditional middle school, though there were probably more opportunities in terms of clubs/athletics etc these were the most difficult years and I would rather my child be in a smaller community during these grades as well.
  • Opening up schools for more enrollment
  • making more room for elementary school age children in their own neighborhoods
  • I think the theoretical benefit is that there will be more classes per grade at a given school, which increases the number of students per grade eligible for enrollment and hopefully the diversity of the students.
  • I personally don’t see a benefit or need to realign the grades. I don’t understand why it is being proposed. We have been constantly told that K-8 models are more beneficial academically and socially for the last few years. I also feel like IPS is rushing such a massive structure change and will be unprepared. The K-8 model seems to be working and I don’t understand the push to make such a massive change.
  • More difficult, high school credit classes can be offered because there will be a larger population of 7th/8th graders available to make up a class.
  • I prefer my kids k-8 set up. I like a small middle school.
  • None
  • The middle school ages children will gain better experience to prepare them for the high school setting and expectations, which in turn prepares them for life after high school.
  • More options for middle school subjects, variety of classes within subject areas, more after school clubs, increased diversity, integration and hopefully inclusiveness and belonging for a wider range of students and staff.
  • None
  • None- get rid of the charter schools and build strong k-8 schools to build community and pride, support the teachers in general, but also support the teachers’ in their continuing education. If Montessori is popular and effective- pay to TRAIN MORE Diverse Teachers that can be most effective in under served neighborhood schools.
  • None. I honestly can’t think of a single good thing that would do for families, teachers, or kids.
  • None- I do not agree with this proposed change at all.
  • None, there are no benefits!!!
  • Continuity across district
  • None that I can see
  • Younger children do not need to be exposed to middle school language and actions. Middle school, grades 6-8, are at a higher maturity levels and their actions influence younger children. They are disrespectful to the younger students. Also, at a middle school, hopefully a security officer works be employed to help teachers with discipline/fights in the hallway. Many teachers are not respected or listened to by the middle schoolers. There is no respect for authority and younger children do not need to be influenced.
  • Less stress for specials teachers who see the whole school. It was allow more planning time and I’d be able to focus on strengthening my lessons for a small group of students.
  • 6-8 works be better able to focus on early adolescents’ personal and social development
  • 6th grade being with peers closer to age as they are approaching puberty. Uniformed across the district where right now it is not.
  • More age appropriate atmosphere if we got o new structure
  • keeps younger kids out of the high schools
  • I believe this model is best for students as it relates to brain maturity levels. In my opinion, 8th grader students should not be in buildings with kindergarten students.
  • There would potentially be more opportunities for classes, clubs & sports at the middle school level.
  • Giving students in upper elementary grades more leadership opportunities (4/5). Giving middle school students a better transitional period before high school.
  • 6-8
  • Sports and activities for middle schoolers, but there are other ways to achieve that
  • Realigning and structuring those grades in different buildings does not bring any new value to the educational process. The focus should be on academics.
  • The primary benefit that comes to mind is to expand our children’s’ relationships with students from other schools. For example, I don’t think it would be bad to have a 6-8 CFI middle school that grabs from each of the existing CFI schools. The only caveat is that I would want to ensure that such a program would mimic the existing MYP program offered at our current school. I wouldn’t want the quality of the education (specifically, access to the IB program) to change as a result of grade realignment.
  • I do not believe there is benefit in changing to K-5 model.
  • There is no benefit, please do not realign them.
  • I don’t know. I’m guessing the district will save money somehow because I can’t see any other benefit. Certainly no benefit to the kids.
  • Encouraging age appropriate development
  • Just building utilization
  • You wouldn’t have 14 and 15 year olds riding the bus with 5 year olds
  • I believe that it will allow for a single framework for grade level arrangement and make it more applicable for building supports.
  • I don’t see one. We chose IPS because of the K-8 models.
  • Since my kids just finished grades K and 3, I do not have any working knowledge pros or cons of splitting up the grades
  • However, those with multi kids, it is more efficient to have kids go to one school instead of having to spend valuable time going between schools. Especially as kids activities increase as they get older.
  • none. keep CFI k-8
  • Focus on early learning which typically runs from birth through age 9.
  • Older kids being separate from younger. Consistency with surrounding school districts for extra-curricular activities.
  • equal treatment for all IPS students
  • I guess older kids wouldn’t be around little kids.
  • I don’t want to realign grades. We selected our school because of the K-8 model.
  • Aligning with surrounding districts
  • None
  • More room in elementary buildings.
  • None, from my personal perspective.
  • I am not sure. Both of my children have thrived in environments where there were a multitude of grade levels. I think there may be some additional camaraderie formed by having middle years together but honestly, have appreciated the varying ages and grades in one building.
  • There are no benefits. Doing so would weaken all schools.
  • none
  • There wouldn’t be older children like 8th graders in the same building as per-k
  • More opportunities for specials
  • More classes per grade level and variety in the students in class each year.
  • Honestly nothing
  • I have questions, not answers. Would it help reduce the districts real estate portfolio? I don’t understand how that is the case but could be supportive if that’s what you are trying to do. Why do you think it would benefit other than aligning with other districts? Message this issue better.
  • More capability from nice schools to get more kids like CFI 70
  • I don’t want to realign the grades. There is HUGE development benefits to the K-8 model for all ages involved. Middle school is such a nightmare for so many kids -why intentionally create that environment when K-8 is working so well??
  • None
  • I don’t see any benefits due to the challenges in next response.
  • a true middle school experience will better prepare students for high school
  • I’m not sure
  • Having larger facilities to accommodate greater numbers of students
  • There is no benefit I am very upset about this potential change
  • Smaller classrooms cause families would elect other school options than IPS.
  • Middle schoolers will feel like they are in a bigger school without the little kids. More tailored to them.
  • A benefit could be more programs for middle school ages (ie language, arts, sports, etc)
  • More options for middle school classes
  • There is none. Our kids have been through enough transitions.
  • No idea
  • More seats per school
  • Don’t see one
  • More teacher collaboration for same grade
  • Perhaps adding an additional classroom for each grade at the existing high performing schools, so those schools could accept more students
  • I prefer the k-8 model, having my kids at the same school enabled me to go back to work full time.
  • Optimizing the tools and resources for the appropriate age groups.
  • I do not know of any.
  • Better preparation for middle schoolers transitioning to high school.
  • I do not see a benefit of realigning the grades. I think the community established in a K-8 school is essential to student development and cannot be achieved in the same manner through K-5 and 6-8 schools.
  • None—unless there is a solid solution for putting kids from different schools and different learning programs together, don’t do. Keep the schools aligned as they are.
  • I’d like to see the data the district is using to lean this direction, as there is MUCH research that shows the exact opposite- that isolating grades 6-8 leads to poorer outcomes. We personally chose IPS because so many schools were K through 8. I believe that age 12 to 14/15 can be challenging and having the strongest sense of community and confidence during these years leads to success. That being said, I wouldn’t be opposed to a separate middle school as it could mean kids could possibly better prepared for larger population high schools. Also, the ability to focus on the specific needs of the age group is a pro if implemented correctly. Lastly, there could possibly be an increased interest to attend IPS high schools.
  • However, it’s the process in which the transition happens that scares me. I think the decision needs to be very carefully thought out, with special consideration for those who are closest to those middle school years. Meaning, there should be some bit of grandfathering for current families in certain grades. Changing a third, fourth, fifth graders schooling can lead to adverse outcomes and potentially a lot of fleeing from the district. If this route is decided, it should be planned for several years in order to be successful.
  • If the goal is to open more seats, who will take these seats? Assume a school that has historically been higher ranked in the lottery (CFIs, butler labs) has more open seats, who will take them? A family who can coordinate the transportation to/from a school farther away may assist with some aspect of diversity but only further creates a divide between the schools you want or the schools you don’t. I would love to hear fewer conversations about that topic and more about how the district stands together. I believe supporting neighborhood schools and facilitating school communities are key to making people proud of their option, and ultimately puts less pressure on the lottery system
  • No benefit
  • I do not support this.
  • There is no benefit. You tried this in the past and it did not work.
  • Increased diversity.
  • None
  • Likely more activities available to middle schoolers
  • Realigning is not preferred.
  • Students get to experience a transition before High School
  • None that I see. This idea was not successful when tried at the high school level a few years ago. Shaking things up in the midst of an ongoing pandemic? NO. My son will be in 4th grade; his last normal year of school was kindergarten. My daughter hasn’t had a normal year of elementary because she’s entering 2nd grade.
  • Enough with changes. Let teachers, administrators and staff do their jobs as educators for one normal year before trying to make significant changes. Give students to show you what they can do when they are IN school, not sitting behind a screen.
  • None
  • I do not support realigning the grades
  • If the IPS system has not been able to replicate success across the range of neighborhood needs to date, I’m not sure I see a benefit in taking what successes there have been and scattering those across new and theoretical configurations that only appear to be a change, and not an actual solution.
  • no benefit that I can see. all it seems to accomplish is realigning for the sake of realigning.
  • Specifically cfi school 2 should be keep k they 8.
  • There would be no benefit for us in realigning the grades as our children attend CFI2. We chose this school for specific reasons, one being that it is K-8. We are really hoping our children can continue to stay at this school until 8th grade year is complete.
  • I can’t think of one.
  • It would hopefully be more academically rigorous, more diverse, and offer additional musical and language options, with more resources for teachers.
  • More buildings available
  • I see no benefit, as studies have shown better outcomes for middle schoolers in k-8 schools especially for self-esteem.
  • Might allow existing high performing schools to expand capacity.
  • There is less of an impact on students who transfer between districts. It can be very impactful if they go from a middle school to an elementary school just because of a district change or vise versa.
  • Easier hiring in the middle grades.
  • Middle schoolers are unique in the their emotional strengths and needs. I intentionally pulled him from a K-8 program to put him in an IPS middle school. He thrived during these years and explored school and extra curricular options not available at his smaller school. I strongly feel that middle school helped transition and ready him for high school at Arsenal Tech. Many parents that I had talked to said the jump from CFI to high school was a culture shock for their students, especially the jump from CFI to ATHS.
  • I see none available
  • Absolutely NONE!
  • More space for popular schools-less dependency on outdoor classrooms (CFI 2)
  • I think having kids from K-8 in the same building can be problematic for the younger kids. The things my incoming 3rd grader has learned and heard from middle schoolers aren’t always great.
  • None. Transitioning to all K-8 buildings would be much better.
  • Less bullying
  • More options.
  • Look, this survey design is so deeply flawed it isn’t funny. You can’t solicit input in this way and call it balanced. One potential benefit is a fresh start across the IPS portfolio. The drawbacks are far greater and completely disruptive.
  • The middle years would have better resources for emotional growth/practice for high school, sports programs, music programs, extra curricular activities with their own age groups. You be able to offer more robust programming with a smaller subset of children. Academically I could see better outcomes with 6-8 middle vs K-8. Again resources better aligned for the group.
  • I could see a dynamic program if we have strong support and leadership, Potential benefits would be: a focus on middle grade social and academic needs, teacher collaboration (philosophies must align), student choice in courses, and more grade appropriate expectations at the middle school level.
  • I don’t personally see one. It seems more beneficial to consolidate with the current alignments.
  • With the CFI middle school I could see job alike teachers being able to collaborate better.
  • K-8 model needs to be preserved. Period. The return to the balanced calendar with longer spring and autumn breaks and shorter summer breaks also needs to be returned. This will help minimize space between school grades.
  • Consistency with what is offered
  • More room to add more grade level classrooms with smaller class sizes for more individual student interaction.
  • None – terrible idea
  • Consistency throughout the district. Giving students in 6-8 more/better opportunities to experience class electives and extracurricular activities. Age groups will be better aligned for their environment.
  • In my view, the biggest benefit would be expanding successful elementary programs within the buildings. I think it would hurt the middle school programs.
  • None that are worth it
  • More focus on that age group.
  • A middle ground step to move into an IPS high school. Currently the magnet programs are ditching IPS at a high school level. The eight grade class at 84 didn’t have a single ips incoming freshman last year. Half of them moved to private. Creating a combined middle school I think would help feed into our high schools.
  • None
  • More support for middle grade teachers & more electives for middle school students
  • Honestly can’t really think of one
  • None that I can think of
  • None. Studies show K-8 schools produce better performing and better prepared students than separating out middle school students.
  • Potential for more differentiation for high ability
  • Younger kids are separated from the drama that pubescent kids are going through.
  • It would make all schools fair and equal. I am pro doing this and was excited when it was announced. It’s not fair some students get to benefit from this and most others do not. Most township schools all have middle schools. K-8 only makes sense in rural areas where you may need to do that for teachers/space. Urban areas make no sense to do this. Make all kids on the same changing schedule going to a new school for grade 6.
  • I honestly am not sure I see a benefit.
  • Better MYP programs
  • Separating kindergarten from 8th grade
  • I don’t see sufficient benefit to justify the change. But it would be consistent with certain other schools.
  • This option would create a more natural pipeline for students to remain within IPS for high school. In our current model, I am concerned about my kids having to go from a school where they’ve known the same 50 classmates since kindergarten to high school where they will be with hundreds of students and likely many of their friends will go to other schools since so many leave the district for private high school or another district’s public option. I believe if there was an IB middle school that brought many schools together for sixth grade, then this larger community would more likely choose to stay together for high school.
  • academic resources and course availability for 6-8
  • Grade appropriate interaction
  • like aged kids together
  • Sports maybe?
  • More room in overflowing schools (CFI, Montessori)
  • Can offer more sports I guess but not everyone will be able to play with the large school
  • Not sure.
  • I do not currently see any benefits.
  • Allow more offerings at middle school.
  • More diversity
  • Improves extra curricular activity options and transition into high school
  • Social / emotional
  • Development and diversity
  • Perhaps easier to compartmentalize age-appropriate language/behavior/issues caused by older and younger kids being in the same building today
  • I see the advantage of a streamlined model that would be less confusing for families.
  • I don’t see any benefit. How does this improve the quality of education? It feels like it comes down to bodies in a building. ie no impact on quality or content of what is being taught.
  • More class opportunities/differentiation
  • I strongly disagree with the change and see no benefit in aligning with other districts. I very much hope that we do not change.
  • More opportunities for sports and music extra curricular activities.
  • Sports opportunities
  • Right now, our school is pre-k – eighth. I’ve heard from my child plenty of times that the middle schoolers are always cussing and doing bad things. I don’t think that the children (especially pre school- 3rd) shouldn’t be exposed to this kind of behavior.
  • Enabling administrators to be able to focus more on a specific age/maturity group.
  • Consistency
  • Consolidated resources
  • I don’t see the benefit and like keeping 8th grade and lower together
  • school potentially less crowded?
  • From our perspective, the only benefit would be financial (through a streamlining of facilities/buildings). If that is the driving factor behind grade realignment, it would be a real disappointment. We believe IPS has built some incredible momentum over the past decade, and it would be truly disheartening to see that jeopardized because of facilities issues.
  • Other than for extreme budget concerns I don’t see any advantage of this.
  • More age appropriate schoolmates.
  • If the IPS Innovations would not have to also abide by this, I don’t think there are any benefits. If they ARE required, then I think it’s probably helpful for training. Doing Professional Development for Kindergarten and 8th graders is a very different thing. Kids will understand what it means to be an Elementary Student and what it means to be a Middle schooler. However, there are some surrounding districts that do not have this configuration. I believe currently Warren’s intermediate schools start at 5th grade. So I’m not sure choosing to do this to match with surrounding districts should be a goal.
  • Helping ease the crowding in high demand programs where the school is beyond capacity.
  • I see zero benefit to realigning grades.
  • Not sure
  • It disrupts communities. None.
  • I see this as a horrible idea, as I feel that our child is familiar with her current school and would appreciate CFI-2 being from classes K to 8, due to bus issues and us working it causes an issue with our kids being moved to a different school. Further, IPS has been shutting down schools versus making new schools so this reduce the options available within our radius.
  • I do not see one without having high demand, higher-performing programs in place for students to attend in Middle School. You cannot take students from Lab, CFI’s, Montessori, Sidener type schools and put them in a regular middle school.
  • More age- specific content
  • This may allow for an easier transition for middle school kids into HS.
  • More options in music and arts for students (orchestra, band)
  • Having a transition from 5th to 6th might help kids with the big transition of 8th to high school. Going from a small school like CFI to a much larger high school population, like Shortridge, would maybe be less overwhelming for kids if they fed into a slightly larger middle school in between.
  • Studies show that 8h grade students score higher on Math and English tests when attending K-8. Also, students of color do better in K-8 schools.
  • Can’t think of one if it’s that age. Consider K-6 and 7-9? I thought research showed that to be the better option for kiddos and transitioning between schools.
  • More kids of the same age in the same place will allow for more variety in sports, clubs, and classes.
  • There is no benefit to families. The board is only thinking about funding and not our child success.
  • None
  • I love the idea of K-5 and 6-8. My oldest is going into 8th grade this year at a CFI school. While I loved the K-5 experience, the MYP experience has not been the best. Middle school students have very different needs and are at a very different place in their development as compared to K-5 students. So to try to serve K-8 in one building, I feel like the MYP students’ needs were not being fully met. A stand-alone middle school would allow for more class options and activity options with a focus on these specific ages. Additionally, this would free up space in the high-demand schools to add more K-5 students.
  • Reduced cost of operating schools.
  • Enhanced Middle School curriculum & sports programs
  • I see no benefit, other than a vague promise that it wills save money.
  • Potentially reducing capacity constraints in buildings
  • NONE
  • I don’t see a benefit, as K-8 schools preform better and the middle school experience is less stressful for kids with reduced bullying and hazing.
  • specializing teachers to scale on a subject.
  • Operational efficiencies for district
  • I am not a fan of this option.
  • Limited
  • Social status of the younger children not being as compromised by the upper class students. ex. K-5 children are on a different page from 6-8 graders thus the same for 6-8 to 9-12. Children are at a different stage in their education, hormonal growth, overall development.
  • N/A
  • Better sports options
  • Zero benefit
  • I think it would likely make running the schools simpler. I could see this being the case for the school administrations as well as the PTAs.
  • A larger, central middle school fed by CFI elementary schools
  • Free up space in over crowded K-8
  • Middle school could be for all CFIs/Montessoris.etc. Could make room for existing K-8 schools that are at max capacity (i.e. CFI2).
  • Do not see the need.
  • We chose our home due to the proximity of our K-8 CFI school. We wanted our three children to get a great education within walking distance of our home. My children and I are very much looking forward to all 3 kids being in the same school building together. This is what my husband and I feel makes our school so special. I don’t think you will get that by removing middle school students from the building. Please don’t!
  • This could provide a reset to potentially improve the experience of students at under performing schools, while only risking the students at schools currently meeting expectations.
  • I understand the need for better building utilization, but have MANY concerns.
  • I don’t see a benefit.
  • I don’t know as I have not heard concrete plans on how this will be implemented.
  • I see no benefit in re-aligning grades. I greatly prefer replication to realignment.
  • Larger middle schools would allow for more peer socialization/prepare for high schools
  • Perhaps keeping the different ages apart is beneficial to some degree however I am in support of keeping k-8 models.
  • None
  • Centralized middle schools.
  • More seats
  • Larger classes
  • No perceived benefit from my perspective
  • Please don’t change the current model.
  • Kids going into middle school will get to meet new kids from other schools before starting high school. Middle school teachers will have colleagues in the same subject they can Collab with.
  • Ability to offer more choices in classes (English, honors English, algebra, geometry) etc. Less teacher burnout.
  • None
  • Cannot think of any. If goal is to expand desirable programs, why mess with what is working? K-8 works and is part of what makes the schools desirable. Most, if not all, of the private schools IPS families leave for are K-8. Why not replicate the most popular models elsewhere, if that is what IPS families want? And if the concern is lack of middle school programming, why not offer more middle school programming opportunities at existing K-8 schools?
  • It aligns with a more traditional breakdown of grades
  • Consolidating could save money
  • The feeling of community by attending a school that is k-8
  • I don’t see the benefit here. Focus on replicating the current K-8 schools that are high performing instead of realigning grades.
  • It is hard to think of one because I truly believe K-8 is so beneficial to the students.
  • I do not believe there is any benefit to disrupting the middle school kids who are currently in a K-8 school. If IPS moved to a middle school for CFI schools, there needs to be a thoughtful transition plan that is implemented with a two-year advance plan to give students and parents the opportunity to plan for this change. I believe in neighborhood schools not bussing students outside their neighborhoods.
  • Middle school is just awful
  • No benefits
  • None. K-8 should remain the standard, especially in CFI schools so that younger kids can see what older kids are doing and how it all relates and builds.
  • Chance for students to interact with different students when transitioning to middle school.
  • I guess less students per class because a lot of families will leave
  • I’m honestly not sure what the benefit would be. I chose that school we are at currently because of the K-8 model. I liked the idea of him being able to go through until high school. I was in IPS when there were middle schools and honestly it was a mess. I’m not sure how the schools would be or how many students would be attending but there would have to be a lot of hard work for me to be confident in this change.
  • More activities available to students
  • One benefit would be to better prepare students for high school.
  • This gives more students per grade which makes more tailored options feasible within the classroom as well as extracurricular.
  • It fits in a nice, neat package on paper. Students may have more course choices in a bigger middle school.
  • Middle school experience
  • There is NO benefit for our school. Montessori depends on grades working together. We also chose a K-8 school so our child WOULD NOT have to experience a true middle school and all the trauma that comes with it.
  • I don’t see a benefit outside of financial reasons. We need to prioritize our students’ education above financial considerations.
  • K-8 models have research to show they are most beneficial educationally / on kids’ outcomes. I would not recommend changing current k-8 schools to k-5 just to make better use of building space.
  • more clubs and sports
  • Kids from different schools intermingling and developing interpersonal relationships prior to high school
  • None. It divides families and forces middle school students to find a new school and transportation. There is currently no IPS middle school near our elementary school. I would be forced to send my 6th grader out of district to private school or Washington Township.
  • Unsure at this time.
  • Age appropriate amenities and extra curricular activities. Transition with their cohort.
  • I understand that a benefit would be greater opportunity for differentiation.
  • I see no benefit to realignment. the reason CFI has been successful is the consistency and the k-8 community. realignment would ruin that
  • I see no benefit to students.
  • To save money is the only reason I can see.
  • None. It’s stupid. Should stay K-8.
  • Configuring with other districts isn’t automatically positive.
  • We do not see much benefit. In fact, we would be likely to transition our children to the local private school to avoid this reconfiguration.
  • I see no benefits. There is no research I have found that shows a benefit to keeping middle school grades separate.
  • None, it would be terrible
  • None. The K-8 facilities at the magnet schools perform better than the other middle schools
  • No benefits that I see unless the process is well thought out, not rushed…
  • I suppose maybe allowing more kids?
  • I do not think this would be a beneficial strategy.
  • I don’t see any benefits to realigning the grades.
  • I worry IPS considers the benefits to be 1) more seats for K-5 kids and 2) reduced costs. However, I feel both are at the expense of 7-8th graders from current K-8 schools.
  • More room at current CFI schools for additional classes
  • Increasing enrollment opportunities at existing high-performing schools
  • I think the magnet schools should stay k-8
  • I don’t see this as beneficial
  • They’d be moving towards a more traditional experience. But that’s not why we chose our school.
  • I really don’t see a benefit.
  • As students become older, they can mix with many more students their age rather than the same 50-75 kids at the smaller k-8 schools. More classes, club offerings.
  • No benefit.
  • none. I believe there are studies showing that K-8s are better than separate K-5s and middle schools.
  • Can focus on age-appropriate development. As a parent of an asynchronous child (brain developed before social/emotional), I can appreciate the structure that K-5 would provide for that child, as well as transitioning to 6-8 and providing that next level of social/emotional stepping stones.
  • Consistency with other district models
  • I know it would free up some seats in currently high-demand magnet programs but that seems like a band-aid. Those new seats would fill up fast and there would still be demand. Also, those seats would remain in the same corridor of opportunity that exists and not reach other neighborhoods that aren’t currently being served with magnet programs.
  • I can’t think of any. If I wanted this model, I would have put my child into one of the other surrounding district schools. This is not a benefit to the district.
  • Kids are grouped with similar aged learners, and can have experience with change and independence before high school.
  • Presumably, more support for middle school focused curriculums with more admin support dedicated to 6-8 grades.
  • I don’t believe global realignment makes sense. For example, we chose 84 in part because of the K-8 model and it works great there.
  • I do not see any benefit
  • I don’t see the benefit, I think it is a detriment – K-8 schools are a great thing.
  • I don’t believe there is a benefit. This was the history of IPS many years ago and did not work well for students or families.
  • A recent study in the AMERICAN EDUCATION RESEARCH JOURNAL confirms why a K-8 school is beneficial. Students who attended a K-8 school are more comfortable, feel safer, and ultimately perform better academically than their counterparts at traditional middle or 6-12 schools.
  • It’s how I grew up
  • practice with transitions, clearer instructional goals and helping students learn how to adapt and reinvent themselves
  • There is very little research backed evidence to support this approach, the benefits are mostly administrative, not educational.
  • I suppose it could allow for more focused interactions among students, but I don’t think that’s much of a benefit.
  • No benefit at all. Again, I see no benefit and I see major negative impact to my children’s school and education.
  • This makes the most sense. I strongly believe that 6-8 graders should have their own programs and school. This would also make the transition to high school much easier for some of our students and support their developmental needs.
  • N/A
  • Younger children not being exposed to behaviors of middle school children.
  • More seats in choice programs, developmentally appropriate teaching and peer grouping
  • Not really any – maybe more class types offered or sports
  • More sports or clubs? Maybe more math classes or robotics or computers?
  • I don’t think there are any
  • I don’t know
  • Younger kids would not be as exposed/influenced by older kids
  • Middle school students will have a true middle school experience tailored to their developmental needs. That is very difficult to do in an elementary building.
  • I think middle schoolers should have their own buildings. It gives them a sense of responsibility and prepares them for high school where they do everything without a guide. When middle school is connected to elementary, I think they still feel very “babied” for lack of better words, and that contributes to behavior problems. The students having to walk themselves to class and know when to stop at their locker and things is important in preparation for high school.
  • Aside from behaviors, I think realigning the grades would allow for more support to all grade levels. Having a k-8 school means you have 1 person supporting 8 grades versus if you split it, you can have 1 person supporting 5 and 1 person support 3 grades (6-8). It would allow more students to get reached.
  • The six graders are not in the same school as early elementary. I feel they would do better in a middle school.
  • Maximizing the use of the 4 current middle schools/More specific and targeted instruction at the Middle School level
  • Middle school and elementary specialists teaching
  • I don’t think there is a benefit to realigning schools; I also think there are fewer schools with this model in the surrounding area. Wayne is K-6; 7-8; freshman center; 10-12. Warren is k-4; 5-6-7-8. Perry is k-5, a 6th grade academy and 9-12 schools. I think you need to check surrounding school configurations.
  • The only benefit I can think of is that IPS would be aligned with other districts.
  • As a middle school educator who has worked both in a combined setting (6-12) and a standalone setting (7-8), I whole heartedly feel that the standalone model is best for the middle grade child. In the standalone environment we can tailor our instruction, interventions, procedures, and policies to best support our students during a unique transition time in their lives. Additionally, it will streamline operations and allow for consolidation which should be budgetarily beneficial to the district as well.
  • Consistency for goals within building
  • There is a massive difference between the youngest and oldest students in a K-6 or K-8 building, and this will allow for younger children to have a safe environment while giving older students the opportunity to develop with peers closer in age.
  • more cost effective
  • There is no benefit, and I can promise you you’ll lose a ton of teachers doing this. Data drove IPs to go to k-8 years ago.
  • Less negative influence on younger kids
  • Better sports teams.
  • I would love for my school to be elementary only so we can focus exclusively on k-5. This would also allow the middle school students to have a more authentic middle school experience with more options.
  • My hope is that larger middle schools could bring back middle school band for all 6-8 graders.
  • In a stand alone 6-8 middle school, you can have more extra programs.
  • Students having more of a middle school experience before high school
  • There are none unless it is a budget concern, This is NIT putting the interests and needs of our children and families first. These configurations have been a disaster in the past which is WHY parents rallied with a lot of hard work to obtain K-8 programs which continue to be in high demand.
  • None
  • None
  • We should have more K-8
  • Opening more spots in current schools
  • I only see benefit to the district with cost savings and no benefit to students at this time.
  • More room in the current schools to provide for higher number of students; improved middle school programming
  • Keeping younger kids out of the difficulties and issues that they are potentially exposed to from the older kids.
  • Sixth graders needs would be better met. How will this impact Pre-K?
  • New mix of kids in middle school, preparing them for an even bigger mix in high school
  • It seems to ease the transition from eighth grade to high school. Perhaps it opens up room for additional classes in thriving elementary schools.
  • IPS is more aligned with surrounding districts, more appealing to community members with kids
  • I can see no benefit to this.

What is one challenge with realigning the grades?

  • I see the combined model as something that allows kids to really develop a community. I see lots of benefits to this model. I also worry the district would lose students after 5th grade.
  • I worry about having just one cfi middle school and how that would affect commute. We picked 27 because it is closest to our house. It is closer than the neighborhood school. We want to be able to walk to school and have the feeling of living in a community.
  • Too many transitions. Breaks up any community built amongst students and staff.
  • It can disrupt the socializing importance for children. And the education literature is clear that this alignment approach is less effective for children.
  • The buildings
  • Do not realign the grades. Montessori is not set up to split grade levels, it is based off older students helping younger students and providing guidance and role models.
  • Transportation challenges- having children from one household attending different schools with potentially differing start and dismissal times. Not only does this present a challenge for self transportation, but with bus transportation as well. Bus transportation has been inadequate over the past two years and children residing in proximity to the school have been encouraged to walk. No issue with that, however, if they’re reassigned to another school a distance away (I.e. grade 6-8), younger siblings will walk and older ones will have to be transported. This certainly presents a challenge to those families lacking adequate resources inclusive of childcare, transportation, etc…
  • Since a significant proportion of children attending IPS are lacking in resources, I find it concerning that this issue wasn’t taken into consideration prior to presenting this proposal. If it was, then it deliberately ignored in my opinion.
  • You will create bigger classes in the same size school. That never seems to lead to better results.
  • Change.
  • Would lack consistency for my child – really wanted same school for 9 years
  • The transition: What is a considerate way to transition a current K-8 to a K-5 when there are kids who were counting on being there until high school? If 91 is transitioned before my children finish there, we will likely leave IPS altogether and go to Washington Township &/or Herron Prep.
  • Fewer opportunities for older children to mentor, more transitions, Difficult for parents with multiple children, mixing kids from different schools at a developmentally challenging time
  • I feel getting parents on board as well as staff may be a challenge at first as they could be resistant to the new changes. I feel if we give enough time and information the transition will be smooth and successful.
  • Too many people in the schools
  • there should not be. let’s make it happen
  • Community buy-in.
  • Losing community, discipline struggles, busing, kids falling trough the cracks in a large school
  • Younger children expose to older children behavior and might try to replicate their behavior.
  • One huge benefit for kids in a K-8 model is the small middle school size which would be lost in the move to middle school buildings. Unlike a more traditional school they have the same teachers 6th-8th for core classes which allows for great relationship building. Relationships are key in education. Students who have good relationships with their teacher do learn better. In a larger 6-8 middle school kids can start to become a number and not a person.
  • In my opinion IPS can’t successfully replicate successful programs AND reconfigure grades. They need to pick one or the other and focus in on that plan and making that plan work. They also need to realize that, in most cases, the successful programs are also the ones not using the district curriculum. It’s less about the “label” (Reggioinspired; CFI/IB; Montessori) and more about being responsive to the students we teach and how we teach them.
  • The district has been shouting the benefits of a k-8 education for the past several (5+) years. This 180 turn seems to be more about money and less about the education our children receive.
  • If you close non-performing buildings and create new opportunities for Choice programs in areas of the city that are not being served, why do you also need to realign the grades? It seems you would be changing what we know to work (smaller class sizes in k8 buildings around a central model) to fit more kids into smaller schools and make very large MS.
  • Middle school is such a tough age that the continuity and small grade size in the current format is a major draw that has major positive impact on kids through this difficult age. I doubt we would continue with IPS for middle school if it makes this change.
  • I cannot think of one negative of separate middle school.
  • Age differences
  • Most (all?) of the “high performing schools” mentioned above are K-8. One idea is to expand these programs; however, if we realign the grades, we are dismantling those same programs. I have not heard or seen anything that suggests how those models work with the middle school grades. It feels a lot like we are prioritizing the elementary school kid needs for these programs at the expense of the middle school students.
  • CFI 79 middle school program is strong so a challenge I see is growing pains and losing a strong program for my children once they get to middle school if IPS makes this switch – why open new buildings and force kids out of well performing schools? Focus on the under performing schools
  • For us, it would be a transportation issue to get kids to different schools. It would depend largely on where the schools were located.
  • You don’t get the possible mentoring between young and older
  • Busing and older students not being able to walk and care for younger siblings. As well as families withdrawing from IPS because they chose their particular school because it was K-8.
  • Losing school choice, having to apply again for muddle school, all the progression from the program lost.
  • The impact it will have on all the K-8 schools and families – this will be especially tough on students who are just getting back to more normalcy after a pandemic. I think pushing kids into different buildings could be detrimental emotionally. Our kids have been through enough these last few years; let’s try to keep as much normalcy as we can for them.
  • Pulling kids out of a school they have been affiliated with for purely political reasons, i.e. clearly targeting a so-called “privileged” school. I’d call that a “challenge”.
  • Split communities
  • Loss of routines and structure. Children thrive on set routines, and middle school years are critical when it comes to supporting the development of confident and secure individuals. Realigning the grades may also lead to the onset of social challenges that would be triggered by a set of factors in this new structure including changed learning formats and strained relationships.
  • siblings in different schools, different location hard on families
  • While it is convenient for families to have all children at one school, we feel it is more important to have grade realigning to concentrate on age and grade specific concentrations in their respective cluster.
  • We love our school and very much want to stay in it through grade 8
  • We love our school and very much want to stay in it through grade 8
  • The most devastating challenge with realigning, (bunching), grade levels is the inappropriate mixing of 6th graders with junior high students as well as 9th graders with high school students.
  • Buildings and Locations.
  • When do you choose to phase it out and can a 7th grade class remain at their school for the final year. Location for the middle school.
  • Lots of families are very worried that the schools we have chosen for our students will cease to exist. We deliberately chose IPS and our magnet school for the continuity our twice exceptional student would receive from elementary through middle school at Sidener where students need extra support and academic challenge. We don’t want to leave our school, and I know many other families do not want to leave their schools either. Unfortunately, I’ve already heard rumblings from many families that they will finally make the move to private schools or townships or leave the city altogether and move the suburbs if this happens. We know students leave IPS in droves for high school, so this change will likely cause privileged families to make the move at middle school instead or never choose IPS in the first place. This saddens me greatly because we love the city and our school. We want all of our city’s schools to be great for all of our kids, but that will be very hard to do with we lose even more students to other districts or private schools.
  • Transportation would be the only challenge, however, I am confident that the district can create a plan that supports all families, students, and staff and roll this out smoothly for all.
  • The only realigning I favor is changing K-8 buildings to K-6.
  • Physical building might not work
  • Nothing. I think it should have always stayed the way it was. There is no reason why we need a school for just 6th graders. Or the same for the just 7 & 8th grades.
  • Fewer students at the elementary school that are already having issues with lower enrollment.
  • The first year will pose challenges of shifting they way parents think.
  • Travel logistics for families
  • not sure
  • More buses
  • School hours changing
  • I really can’t think of one.
  • It is amazing the way that it is.
  • Where are the 6-8th graders going to be housed/
  • Breaking up the proven K-8 schools just to align with surrounding districts would be one of the worst decisions that IPS has made. Please take a look at schools in IPS that are successful and dig deep to see why. Is it the educational model (Montessori, Butler Lab, language or arts focus) or grade configuration? Putting more resources toward replicating what works would be a much better solution than upending those higherperforming schools.
  • I don’t think the 6-8 model helps develop relationships. Why would we put all those students dealing with so much all together with new people, new staff, no connection when they need so much connection? Show me the research that shows it works in larger urban systems.
  • Parents having to drop off in multiple locations
  • Transportation is already a barrier for many neighborhood school families who fall within the “walk/drive” area. Splitting grades will make more challenges for families who may need to transport students to multiple buildings. We are currently bussing students across the city to choice schools, while there are families who are within the “walk/drive” zone who cannot get to school safely or easily. Young children are not able to walk to school alone, and the infrastructure around many schools is not safe for students walking or biking along high traffic roads. I worry access will become harder when students are required to travel further, and families split between multiple buildings.
  • I don’t see one. Most school districts Separate out middle school and junior high’s.
  • Parent/Staff by in, and transportation.
  • Funds to adequately create functional spaces in close proximity for existing students.
  • We chose to apply out of district specifically for the Montessori program and the fact it would carry through 8th grade. I think those three schools in particular would benefit more from being able to continue their model, or at least a Montessori middle school be designed.
  • Innovation schools, like Montessori, empower children by allowing younger children to learn from older children. For example, our middle schoolers are closer as peers to the 4/5th grade community and often will work with these individuals to help them with curriculum, music, etc. This empowers the MS age kids to share their knowledge but also appreciate their ability to contribute to the society. Montessori curriculum uses multi age level classes based on benefits reported in several research studies. Further, peer teaching and support is absolutely critical for child development and builds strong bonds that adult/child relationships may not be able to fill.
  • You will move great teachers from buildings and schools where they have developed relationships with the incoming students, parents, and community at large. You will remove the possibility of the younger children being able to learn from the older children. You will take from the older children the ability to assume leadership positions and a sense of growth and accomplishment. You will put the older children in positions of uncertainty and wariness, when they should be feeling their strongest, most capable selves. You will be taking the middle schoolers from their places of comfort and stability during a time when their hormones are unstable and they are most uncomfortable with their bodies. It doesn’t make any sense. You remember middle school, right?
  • ?
  • It makes transportation harder for families with kids in different grades, which is a strain on poorer families in particular
  • Putting 6th graders with 7 and 8 could be hard on the 6th graders.
  • The challenges with realigning grades far outweigh the benefits. Challenges include (i) losing the strong sense of community that is evident under the current IPS structure, (ii) no longer facilitating the ability for older students to mentor/teach younger students, and (iii) for parents with multiple young children, realigning into K-5, 6-8 would make things more difficult as parents need to manage kids at multiple IPS schools. In short, the current IPS structure works well overall and my fear is that realigning grades will result in IPS taking an unnecessary step backwards.
  • Building space for middle schools and the cost of maintaining buildings
  • Again, this is a BAD idea. Middle school is so difficult. The current K-8 model at 91 and other magnets works. The students have grown up together and are part of community. They are therefore more supportive of one another and you therefore skip many of the middle school nightmares – fights, bullying, drugs, etc. Our youngest of 6 is entering 6th grade at 91. We do not want him at a traditional middle school. Please don’t try to fix what isn’t broken.
  • Student teacher relationships
  • Loosing student teacher relationship
  • Families like the idea of their child attending one school prior to high school. Typically all siblings are in the same building.
  • Transportation costs will seemingly go up. Right now a family that rides 2 different buses may be moved to needing 3 separate bus pick-ups at that address. 2) If you mix charter/lottery and regular schools in middle school, kids who are behind due to the different curriculum at the regular schools are going to slow down learning for the charter school kids, which is not fair to them. Leveling at the middle school level would be crucial.
  • Our family is excited about the pk-8 model at Montessori 91, and how a smaller middle school could benefit our kids. I worry about a larger middle school meaning fewer chances for the arts and a closer knit community. Please keep the arts available to all students.
  • In the past IPS incorporated community schools serving grades 7-12. Parents felt their 7th and 8th graders were not ready to be in a high school setting. We expanded our K-6 to K-8. At that time, parents felt the middle school children were too old to be in an elementary setting. Also, transportation was an issue. Some schools experienced more discipline issues than others. In our community schools, I recall an issue with middle school test assessments lower than high school.
  • Transition from current configuration and disrupting successful schools seems to be a challenge. K-8 seems to be working well in several schools. Also schools that have been stable and successful as K-6 would be disrupted. Having everyone do the same does not equal success. The schools that are innovating and building on those innovations will not be able to focus on pedagogical success and building within and going onto the next steps because of the configuration disruption which does not have a track record of in and of itself of bettering schools. The IPS choice schools are incubators for success and anything that will take away from their models and their concept fidelity, such as this grade reconfiguration, is not worth the disruption in my opinion.
  • more/extra work moving 6th graders into middle school
  • maybe funds
  • building with too many students. A campus of 1,000 middle schoolers would not be successful I believe. You would need additional arts and foreign language teachers for these campuses, which are challenging to find. Setting up libraries in each building would also be challenging. Would you take books from existing K-8 schools and send them to new middle schools? Would additional funds be made available to set up high quality libraries in each building? Any IB campus would need a certified librarian at least half time per the IB requirements.
  • I think that 6th graders should not be in with all 7th and 8th graders. 6th graders need that last in elementary year to prepare for muddle school. They are not ready emotionally or psychological to handle the true middle school experience. There are plenty of 6th graders who are only 11 years old and plenty of 8th graders that are already or almost 15. There is a lot of difference between these age groups. Putting 6th graders in such close contact with 8th graders causes 6th graders to face older types of peer pressure.
  • I strongly prefer the K-8 model that cold spring has. It allows the students to maintain strong relationships with staff members including the “specials” teachers and admin staff in a close knit community over many years. Especially during the transition into junior high years, this presents many benefits for these children. I will be disappointed if that option is removed
  • Some of the choice programs, like the Montessori programs, would have a difficult time in the transition as they use mixed age classrooms. Mixed age classrooms benefit the children because the older kids help the younger kids and it teaches them empathy and responsibility.
  • It will lead to larger schools and the possible elimination of special schools like high ability due to the lower enrollment at such schools.
  • They would lose the benefit of their current programing (i.e. Montessori) and some children are not prepared for middle school emotionally, mentally.
  • I do not believe there would be any challenges for the parents and students.
  • Probably one of the challenges would be adults adapting such as some faculty and some family members.
  • Transportation
  • Timeline for doing so. When will this be implemented. Also, transportation to multiple schools for parents with two or more children.
  • Students lose their friends in other grades, siblings would be split up going to different schools at an earlier age. Students would lose the support of past teachers and administrators they are comfortable with and who know the student’s history. It is traumatic at the 9th grade level and would be even more so at the 6th grade level.
  • Requires more resources, where resources could be shared between many grade levels.
  • “I would like to see the educational models from elementary school maintained… or like schools grouped. Lab Schools + CFI in 1 middle school for example.
  • There are MANY parents that believe K-8 schools allow their children to avoid the bullying and mental health challenges of middle school, IPS will need to be proactive about this belief and/or reality.
  • Larger middle schools are not a good solution.
  • Younger siblings is not attending school with older siblings; safety walking to school
  • How are you going to replicate the highly successful special choice programs like Montessori and CFI in middle school? The opportunity for these programs during K-8 is one of the main reasons we chose IPS.
  • It typically takes 5-7 years to gain fluency in a language so changing from k-6 to k-5 would take away a year from fluency.
  • Multiple students from one family at different locations.
  • Younger siblings is not attending school with older siblings; safety walking to school
  • You lose the community feel of the school. The beauty of K-8 is that as a new parent, you are alongside parents who have been there for nine years or more who know the good, bad, and in between – and can give you a sense of context when things are challenging. Students feel strong connections to their teachers and their administrators.. you throw that out the window if you re-align the grades… I can’t imagine how you state you’re going to replicate successful schools and start by throwing out one of the key ingredients of their success.
  • Lose the biggest benefit to IPS – combined K-8
  • Leaving the safety and security of a k-5 system at an elevated emotional time would be hard for all kids. Teachers and team members get to know kiddos in elementary school. Keeping that stability as kids become tweens and teens is beneficial to everyone in the IPS family.
  • I work in a neighboring township and many students don’t look forward to middle school, so replicating that isn’t something I’m looking for. I chose IPS because of the k-8 model and will likely leave if that model does.
  • Scheduling and transportation timing for children in same household
  • Where are the resources for these buildings and staffing coming from? Our building is in need of repairs and has no secure vestibule. Yet is a thriving program. Ensure the safety of your current schools before over promising and under delivering.
  • transportation and distance
  • Makes life harder for working parents with multiple children. Means that children have to go through the stress of switching school multiple times for no reason.
  • Rehiring students and organizing separate classroom space for nes grade splits.
  • Space, buildings in the city?
  • Loss of consistency, community, support and the mental health/well-being of our students.
  • Many of the choice schools have specific focuses ( IB, Reggio, Montessori,etc). Will the middle school offerings align with these focuses that are continuing to “work” each year?
  • Will class sizes remain smaller? These choice programs work due to their smaller class sizes and community/neighborhood school feel.
  • Where will you put the middle schoolers? How will you continue IB programming?
  • Differing school proximity for siblings in grade and middle schools
  • One of the things I was most excited about moving to the district recently was the stability of the community we were joining. We were excited for the k-8 model and the longevity that would provide. Also, our daughter will be attending Sidener. We are very concerned about what this change would mean for the high ability environment.
  • Could lead to closing existing schools due to the loss of a lot of their students & staff.
  • Having K-8 schools is practical for families and developmentally advantageous for kids. Families with multiple children cannot fully invest themselves in multiple schools. It puts families in the hard position of trying to decide where to invest their support and resources. Families and schools will both feel the strain. Kids will also miss out on the culture of these schools. Having the middle school and elementary grades together allows for more confidence and security as they grow. It fosters community and mentorship.
  • You will lose high touch programs that meaningfully impact students lives at a vulnerable time. You will lose dedicated teachers and all families with means to send their kids out of district
  • Takes our children in school specific programs out of them earlier than we were wanting
  • Possibly Transportation issues and timeframes of how long it will take to implement these plans
  • Those that have realigned their housing, jobs, and lives to be centered around their children’s school will inevitably have to face future barriers when their children get to the age to transition to another school (earlier than expected). Those with multiple children now at two different schools will face transportation barriers for parents. As a single parent who works and also goes to school full time, getting my young children to school on a daily basis is a constant chaotic battle. Trying to navigate two schools with potential different start times, and school events will be another obstruction to success for us. I am one person, and bus transportation has been unreliable in the past.
  • It feels as though it’s an unnecessary transition that will also provide unnecessary stressors on the children getting acclimated to new schools. If there are new schools with different children, this increases the likelihood of adversary childhood experiences with bullying, low self esteem, and unnecessary anxiety/potential depression.
  • It took me 4 years to get my kids into 91. Please don’t make us leave the building. There are better ways to revitalize the structure of IPS.
  • IPs Middle schools have not historically been successful
  • The stability of being with peers from k-8
  • It’s different 🙂
  • Siblings at different schools- scheduling issues including transportation
  • More transitions from elementary to middle school (rather than k-8).
  • Change
  • Already difficult time staffing, and where would these separate middle schools be?
  • Families are invested in our K-8 schools. I, personally, don’t want to see the change. We don’t want to do the lottery process again either. What would it take to get a placement in a new 6-8 school?
  • The loss of sending my kids to a smaller neighborhood school. Part of the appeal of sending our kids to #57 is the fact it is K-8. The teachers really get to know each kid, especially at the Middle School level. My shy 7th grader is not just a name on a seating chart lost in the shuffle of larger, shifting classes.
  • Changing schools
  • I imagine it could be very logistically difficult to make this realignment a reality. To change the landscape of schools to accommodate new and different groups of kids could be tough. Not to say it’s not worth doing if we know the advantages, but if they are nebulous and only backed by flimsy opinions like the one I gave above, might not actually be worth it.
  • 9th grade students are very young to be in the same school at 12th graders and could be problematic.
  • Risk in discontinuity potential in programs such as IB
  • I would like my kids to be in CFI-84 K-8. We choose this school so our kids are not bused around the town to get to school. We like the small community.
  • How would that look for high performing/high demand schools? Would all CFI schools have one middle school? Butler Lab? Montessori? etc.? If students, parents and families are not aligned with the philosophy and vision of the school that change may have a negative impact and you may drive families away from IPS. When would this start? My son is in 7th grade this year at a K-8 school and want to know where he will be his last year before HS. What options are provided to buildings and families?
  • my kids won’t all be in same school. younger kids won’t have older kids to look up to.
  • many elementary schools have excellent middle school programs that would disappear
  • IPS has so many choice schools with different curriculums. How do you consolidate those middle schools? A middle school for each curriculum?
  • Huge changes are always a risk. But maybe in normal years these high performing schools could weather the changes- but I (a single mom with a Hispanic child fwiw) worked hard to get into a CFI school and they seem to be truly struggling right now. A lot of the things that made them unique (like the removal of desks and great teachers and subs) have either not been brought back in yet OR there is an extreme shortage of. You can sense the fatigue in the staff and I think changing the model right for those schools that are trying to come back form the covid storm could tank the few high performing schools that we have. Again, I sincerely think huge shifts like moving kids out of the older grade years would be the final straw and performance would drop abruptly.
  • IPS lacks the ability to adequately support the number of schools now (athletic facilities, transportation, field trips, etc) and splitting out middle schools will only exacerbate that issue. There are many other challenges that will only result in IPS becoming less attractive to families.
  • I think there are MANY challenges in changing up how choice school teaching methods are organized, but one of the most difficult challenges for parents will be having children at multiple schools with VERY POOR transportation options. The IPS bus service has been spotty and unreliable for many years, and after-school programs regularly fill up at the start of the school year. Why do you want to add an additional burden on parents while at the same time taking away their CHOICE to send their kids to the same (or different) schools?!
  • You have models that work in Montessori in CFI why would you want to change that adapt your other programs to what already works splitting like everyone else does not work
  • I feel this was done before and it failed, so things were reconfigured as they are now. Please take care to make sure we don’t just repeat mistakes of the past.
  • There are studies showing that whenever there’s a transition, scores drop and there’s a deficit. I think it’s also really good for our 8th graders to share space with Kindergarten.
  • One of the reasons the high-demand programs are so popular is because they are K-8. Realigning the grades removes that benefit and all that comes with it for both middle and elementary programs (smaller class sizes, personalized attention, stability, community building, to name a few) and introduces another point of transition and uncertainty for students and families. Combining this with the proposed rezoning (and I support the rezoning in theory) will dismantle school communities in a way that may take years to stabilize.
  • Everything
  • Students who are in a K-8 school and have planned/want to stay enrolled there until end of 8th grade- this would be very hard
  • You are taking students out of a familiar setting and education format that was set up from Kindergarten. Moving students from a specific program to a middle school at the end of their K-8 experience is not what parents enrolled for at IPS. I believe like so many if the new format happens you will lose a large population of students in choice schools to private schools or different school districts.
  • You’re going to get a lot of privileged parents fighting this simply because they don’t want to have to go through a middle school “process.” I think this could be mitigated some with feeder middle schools but ultimately you’ll still have a vocal minority yelling about it. I’m super open to the idea of reconfiguring if we can actually articulate the benefits and I can understand the benefit to the students at large, even if I’d prefer something different for my own student.
  • I think the younger kids benefit from seeing the older kids in their schools. The montessori method is built upon community learning and it would be reduced by realigning the grades.
  • Individuals with relocation issues.
  • The idea that you’d like to isolate children during one of their most crucial developmental stages. It is working, I don’t understand why anyone would propose to change something that isn’t broken
  • There is no clear plan for maintaining continuity for the currently high performing K-8 schools when they are split into two separate schools.
  • Transitioning between schools
  • Realigning grades would mean that students and families lose the benefits that K-8 schools offer such as: o Students and families in K-8 schools have longer to build relationships with the school community and staff. This can improve trust and in turn improve the overall experience students have with the school, their willingness to stay (and not transfer out of district) and their academic outcomes o Students are able to grow and become leaders, examples to younger students, see roles that they can mature into o The change to secondary education comes later when students are in a different social/emotional stage of development and could be more prepared for the transition o Continuation of educational philosophy/method could be easier when the continuation from K to 8 is already there
  • Questions about potential challenges of reorganizing:
  • -Will the choice programs still be able to continue into middle school? What does it take (financially, logistically, adequate buildings) to have a Montessori middle school, a CFI middle school, a Butler Lab middle school and so on?
  • -This is a huge transition for middle school teachers and staff who have been well established in their K-8 communities for many years. This is potentially a huge hiring/staffing challenge as new administration will be needed and possibly new teachers and staff. would be needed (if current middle school staff choose to not stay)”
  • Multiple kids may be different drop off locations and schedule.
  • I don’t know – this is already what we experience and frankly it’s irritating so many other kids get to continue through 8th and ours don’t – seems we would continuity in an immersion program even more so than others.
  • I don’t think anything needs to change. Both of my students are honor roll kids
  • Teachers do not have the ability to monitor problem students proactively when they are in a new building.
  • Families in high performing schools will leave the district just as happened with Shortridge when Broadripple closed. Our school used to have half of the graduates go to Shortridge and this year there were none.
  • IPS has made too many changes (school radius, start times, school closures, school calendar) in a short period of time. Schools are successful because of stability and neighborhoods/families valuing education.
  • Changing to align with outside districts would make it easier for people to leave the district for middle school.
  • Overall, there are many more negatives to this proposal than there are benefits.
  • I think there will be many challenges with the structuring the grades in IPS. For example, kids may not be able to continue in their choice schools depending on the lottery results. Also equity issues, will there be a middle schools in all communities? what schools will be closed that will lead to inequity? Again, I do not understand why the theme of the survey went from increasing the equity to what schools should be replicated and how difficult it will be to restructure the grades. I think the biggest challenge would be how the restructuring will affect inequity in the district.
  • Based on being a parents of a child attending a K-8th school currently, my child has gained a lot from the older (middle school) kids – by partnering younger children with older (for example book buddies) it gave my child an older mentor and connection to the school. At our current school there is a great community and leadership set by the middle school.
  • The IPS stand-alone middle schools as is are some of the worst performing schools in the state on ILEARN. How would schools be set up better for success?
  • Research clearly states removing 6th grade from K-6 and transitioning K-8 to 6-8 will harm students. This aspect of the proposal is a terrible idea. o Research does not support removing 6th grade from a K-6 model in favor of a middle school (6-8) model. ▪ Increased citations for discipline infractions. Sixth grade students attending middle schools are much more likely to be cited for discipline problems than those attending elementary school. That difference remains after adjusting for the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the students and their schools. ▪ Increased discipline citations persist through the following years. The higher infraction rates recorded by sixth graders who are placed in middle school persist at least through ninth grade. ▪ Decreased on-time high school completion. The impact of removing the 6th grade from an elementary program, K-6, and moving it to a middle school, 6-8, decreases on-time high school completion by approximately 1-3 percent. o Research does support dismantling the current K-8 model in favor of a middle school (6-8) model. ▪ Significant drops in academic achievement for both math and English. ▪ Significant drops in academic achievement are similar for boys and girls, but stronger for students with low levels of initial achievement. ▪ Academic achievement drop during the transition year persists through grade 10. ▪ Middle school entry increases student absences. ▪ Middle school entry is associated with higher grade 10 dropout rates. ▪ Little evidence placing public school students into middle schools during adolescence is cost-effective. ▪ Bottom Dog experiences are better for K-8 students. Top dog/bottom dog phenomenon, states that students at the top of a grade span (“top dogs”) have better experiences than those at the bottom (“bottom dogs”) regarding bullying, safety, belonging, and academic achievement. The students who transferred into a K-8 school in sixth grade still had better experiences than students who started at a 6-8 school. ▪ Success of students in K-8 models not due to resources, such as per-pupil expenditures or class size. o Research authors vocalize K-8 support in articles promoting their work. ▪ In their article on their research, The Middle School Plunge: Achievement tumbles when young students change schools, researchers Guido and West write, “Our findings clearly support ongoing efforts in urban school districts to convert stand-alone elementary and middle schools into schools with K-8 configurations…[P]olicymakers should exercise caution before extending the middle-school experiment to school districts that still enjoy the K-8 configuration.” ▪ In their article, “Stuck in the Middle: How and why middle schools harm student achievement,” based on their research, authors Lockwood and Rockoff state that throughout the middle school years, students fall further behind and score below what would be expected if they’d gone to a K-8 school. They end their article, “Of course, it is possible that transitioning to high school could be more difficult for students who come from K-8 schools than for middle school students. If K-8 students experience a larger drop in achievement upon entering high school, that could bring the two groups of adolescents back into parity. But it is hard to recommend closing the middle-school achievement gap by bringing everybody down. The better option is to address the trouble with middle schools – or do away with them altogether. ▪ “There are, no doubt, many highly effective middle schools and many ineffective K–8 schools,” [Martin West] says. “Our evidence suggests that, on average, students do worse academically when they attend middle schools than when they attend K–8 schools — and that this is true in urban, suburban, and rural settings.” Footnotes with citations did carry over:Cook, Philip J., MacCoun, Robert, Muschkin, Clara & Vigdor, Jacob. 2006. Should Sixth Grade be in Elementary or Middle school? An Analysis of Grade Configuration and Student Behavior. National Bureau of Economic Research. Bedard, Kedard and Do, Chau. 2005. Are Middle Schools More Effective? The Impact of School Structure on Student Outcomes. Journal of Human Resources. https://faculty.econ.ucsb.edu/~kelly/middle.pdf Schwerdt, Guido, and Martin R. West. 2012. The impact of alternative grade configurations on student outcomes through middle and high school. Journal of Public Economics. Schwartz, Amy Ellen, Steifel, Leanna, and Rothbart, Michah W. 2016. Do Top Dogs Rule in Middle School? Evidence on Bullying, Safety, and Belonging. American Educational Research Journal – Social and Institutional Analysis. Kamenetz, Amy. 6th Grade Is Tough; It Helps To Be ‘Top Dog’. https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/09/19/494232646/sixth-grade-istough-it-helps-to-be-topdog?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium =social?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medi um=social Schwerdt, Guido, and Martin R. West. 2012. The impact of alternative grade configurations on student outcomes through middle and high school. Journal of Public Economics. Article by the authors regarding their research can be found at: https://www.educationnext.org/the-middleschool-plunge/ Lockwood, Benjamin, and Jonah Rockoff. “Stuck in the Middle: How and Why Middle Schools Harm Student Achievement.” Education Next, v10 n4 p68-75 Fall 2010. Article by the authors regarding their research can be found at: https://www.educationnext.org/stuck-in-the-middle/ Tamer, Mary. 2012. Do Middle Schools Make Sense? New Research finds that keeping students in K-8 schools has benefits. ED. Harvard Ed. Magazine. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/12/09/do-middleschools-make-sense
  • Kids being removed from their established social and classroom structure. Forcing families to make last-minute decisions about new middle-school only options, after they selected schools where they thought their kids could be through 8th grade. Student attrition because families will opt for charters or private schools instead of newly configured middle schools that they feel are too large, with no understanding of the culture of those new schools (I had a parent from another school tell me point-blank if his kid’s school goes to 1-5, he will pull him and send him to Oaks). We rather saw that happen when the high schools were consolidated.
  • There are some schools that the model is working well in. For those schools and their design, why change something that is working for them just to align with everyone else? This should be specific to each school and their overall individual performance and needs, not district wide.
  • Student retention
  • Losing benefits to keeping schools smaller such as quality of programming
  • Leave them the way they are.
  • Not enough schools to do that or kids will be really far apart, example like one kid in elementary and another kid in middle and the schools are not close to each other so drop off and pick up could be challenging.
  • None . Most schools are k-5
  • using these models as guides for successful programming and your reasoning for recreating them, then dismantling them and what makes them successful is a challenge. Separating families that rely on their older children to get their younger children to school because ips took away transportation for some families is a challenge. Taking apart teacher and parent communities that have been built for years and are dependent on the longevity of parents being a part of the school and program is a challenge. Way more challenges then benefits in my opinion.
  • Have k-8 in the same building allows for much more social/emotional learning than separating those grades
  • There are many. What makes magnet program successful now is that with a K-8 model, families are able to invest in the school and relationships knowing they will be there for 9 (even 10) years. Without that structure, there isn’t incentive to invest in building of community. You’re not replicated successful models if you’re destroying what makes them successful. Also, increased bullying at the middle school level.
  • Parents who have multiple kids like that their children can be at the same school (i.e. grades k-8). So I would leave this the way it is.
  • It will be a years long change.
  • There are many challenges that will be at place here, but the largest one is that our children will be Guinea pigs in a plan that failed many years ago, and is trying to be quickly revamped and put into place. The k-8 model that we have currently promotes a safe space for children to learn in smaller class sizes. It offers more parent/family involvement since families often have multiple students in the same building at once. Our kids walk to school and do not have transportation. The older children are responsible for walking the younger children to and from school because of two full time working parents. Forcing children to leave their beloved schools after 5th grade breaks down our community. I will be really honest, I worked in HSE as a 4th grade teacher and I did NOT want my kids to be in a system like that. That’s why we moved to IPS. The k-8 platform is the best way to meet all learners; it promotes risk taking and cultivates better learning because students are in a safe, familiar place with teachers they have known for many years. Thanks for listening.
  • Disintegrating the school community built on lasting relationships and continuity in smaller class sizes and number of classes per grade which is better for students and teachers
  • Sounds like it would make districting more difficult.
  • The k-8 model allows kids continuity through their most important years. I am against creating 6-8 schools.
  • Middle school students transition at a time that is already difficult for child development and learning.
  • Some of the above programs require k-12 curriculum, better addressed in buildings of k8
  • Many of the k-8 schools build community. The kids at these schools have the same elective teachers all 8 years; they have all of their former teachers in the same building to continue to support them. We understand children need social supports—why would you even consider making them feel more isolated in middle school, one of the most difficult times in their lives?
  • Specifically, as a Montessori parent, removing students at a critical point in their education (6th grade) would disrupt the extended learning and growth they receive through this methodology prior to entering a traditional high school. Would IPS consider a Montessori middle school? Essentially the program is being destroyed, not “expanded” if you don’t have the follow through of keeping the students k-8 or creating a middle school that would house this philosophy. I due believe it should be offered to more families that are interested. However, it’s difficult for students to drop into this program at any age beyond 2nd grade without a Montessori background. Therefore, growing the program from the lower elementary grades seems suitable so long as the classroom size doesn’t become overwhelming to our teachers and dilute the small group learning approach. Perhaps the increased enrollment of the lower elementary will provide a strong “feeder” pathway to a Montessori middle school. I realize IPS has to look beyond this specific segment of schools. Nonetheless, providing a clear “track” for the students is what will allow this program to grow sustainably with the support of parents.
  • The deterioration of the current programing in that the K-8 structure is key to it.
  • The students will have to transition buildings two times in approximately 2 years. One of the reasons we chose our current school is that it goes from PreK-8
  • I feel very strongly that the current k-8 pattern should continue because it keeps middle school kids in an environment where they are not isolated during a very difficult transition phase in their lives. We have an only child but I also think keeping k-8 together is important for families with more than one child because it reduces the number of schools families have to drop off/pick up at each day and keeps siblings together longer where they can look out for each other. Please keep k-8 together.
  • Breaking up the learning communities that have been built over years at the existing schools.
  • Many parents who like k-8 are going to be upset
  • Will there be enough buses
  • We do not want to realign the grades. School #91 is a very diverse, A rated k-8 school where everyone is happy. Why mess with a system that works?
  • What historical success has IPS seen with a 6-8 model?
  • We stayed at the lab school because we live the idea of keeping middle school small and our kids having access to teachers and relationships they’ve been nurturing since kindergarten
  • Potential longer distance to get to the school. This might create unforeseen challenges for some people. Unproductive time in transit to school.
  • Children usually in the six grade wouldn’t have to be on the bus stop . Where the bus pick up time is 6am. Not fair
  • Expectations build different anxieties
  • Expectations build different anxieties
  • Have you been in an IPS middle school classroom? Have you sat thru every class and stood in the halls during class change? I have, I volunteered prior to the pandemic. It’s crazy. The challenges that a middle schooler deals with is exacerbated with the cognitive and physical changes that are taking place. Middle school teachers need to be able to help these kids acclimate and adjust over the three year period. Taking 60 kids from each k-8 school and putting 600 of them into one school, where they don’t know the teachers, and the teachers don’t know them, is not only difficult from an educational standpoint, but how do you scale the support that is needed to provide a safe and successful environment?
  • You talk about equity for ‘other’ schools, but how can opening up more classrooms in four-five schools on the Northside, help a kid who lives at 38th and Moeller? That is a long drive everyday for a kid on a bus. Why don’t you invest the money to these ‘other’ schools and help them to plan and practice the same programs that the higherperforming schools have – Invest in the curriculum. Invest in the schools as they sit now, don’t move kids, teachers, and problems to new places. IPS tried this approach 30 years ago and it didn’t work then. It won’t work now because honestly, IPS doesn’t have the money or the manpower to support these kids. We want all kids to have an equitable education, but changing everything that these kids have known for the last six years, at such a crucial time, is unfair to them. Give these kids what they need; give them stability and community. And ask yourself, do I want my middle schooler to be in with 600 people they don’t know? To be with people that don’t know them at all? Or do I want the teacher that has seen them grow up over the last six years to be part of their lives.
  • middle school disasters; losing kids to pvt and out of county
  • Students perform better in K-8 schools. Transitions are minimized, Families are able to stay together longer and me involved in the same school together in a more cohesive fashion. Adolescents are challenged to become leaders and model growth at a time when they could default to floundering and uneasiness instead.
  • IPS does not currently have a group of high-performing, highly-sought-after 6-8 schools to replicate so it would be ending all of the programs that are currently demonstrating success and high-interest for families in the K-8s to experimentally build more 6-8s. As a parent and an educator, I know that there is data to support both K-5s/6-8s and K-8s. Personally, our family intentionally chose a school that has a K-8 because of the many inherent challenges that already exist with the middle-grade years. As we navigate social media and mental health, K-8s allow students to remain supported in safe, known communities and to finish out their early/middle grades education in the same model. I am aware of schools who have added grades 6-8 recently due to family demand to “please let our students stay at this school!”. It is heart-wrenching and upsetting to picture all K-8s having to end after 5th grade to send students to unproven new 6-8s.
  • We selected IPS bc it provided the option to send our kids to the same school for 8 years. The current alignment has worked so well in making IPS an option over private schools w it’s option to send kids to K-8 schools. Realignment will definitely make us and many other families reconsider options as we have kids kindergarten-middle school and would like to keep them in the same school. This gives a sense of identity, consistency, and safety.
  • Please see answers above
  • I think putting 6th grade in middle school is to early, they need that extra year of elementary
  • Current schools would lose 6th grade students and staff associated with that grade level. For Theodore Potter, this would be very difficult, and a strong commitment to maintaining dual language in 6th-8th would have to be upheld by IPS.
  • Just one? Where do you find the teaching staff when many middle grade teachers in k-8 buildings don’t hold licenses for one subject, but general Ed 6-8. Where do you find special area teachers for the new 6-8 buildings because the special teachers may choose to stay with their current school? When you look at test scores (and we all know kids are more than that, right?) do you see greater success at large middle schools or is it better in the magnet/choice k-8 schools where kids have been for their entire education? Do you see a lot of transient students in the choice program middle grades? How many more classrooms could actually be added successfully in the current k-8 buildings by taking out a few classes? What does transportation look like? We already have buses that struggle to run routes to these schools, so why add in more schools and more routes? Have you considered the loss of student money from the state when kids leave the district at 6th grade instead of the exit issues at 9th grade? Or even, families that will chose to not ever come to the district because they pick schools based on the continuation of a program and school community for the major portion of their children’s academic career? And finally, if we are thinking of the students here, don’t we want them to have an environment where they have seen where they will go when they are little and can also look back at how far they have come when they are big? Don’t we want them to have a community of teachers who have known them and their families for years? Upper grade teachers start knowing kids when they are little and the younger grade teachers follow their education. The community is strong and because of that, the kids are mentally in a better space, with emotional support, academic support, and for many it’s even more than that! Please consider keeping the k-8 communities together. Visit the k-8 schools and see the communities in action!
  • Very opposed to this “one size fits all approach” and would likely leave IPS over it. Should be determined on a school-by-school basis. Safety and development of students who choose to stay within a single school would be undermined as relationships with staff and younger/older students would be unnecessarily severed and opportunities to differentiate/accelerate would be precluded. For schools that have built a caring learning community, this would destroy that culture and likely lead to additional behavioral and violence issues. A wholesale realignment is counter to IPS’ stated goals of “academic excellence built through individualized, relationship-based learning,” “committed to serving individual students with what they need,” and “power to create their own future” by removing choices and opportunities. It is quite possible that a blanket realignment will accelerate the departure of families from the IPS district.
  • Please see above.
  • You’ll be disrupting tight knit, local k-8 schools that have thrived and really created an ethos throughout the child’s time there: it also would create increased logistic issues for bussing and parents depending on how far away the location of those middle schools should be compared to the choice or neighborhood schools.
  • We know that traditional middle school 6-8 models don’t work as well. The K-8 model has both academic and social/emotional gains for kids. I have seen this first hand at our wonderful Montessori school. PLEASE do not dismantle this!
  • Switching children out of their k-8 school mid middle school. Should be phased in moving forward and kept with school choice ie CFI, Montessori , traditional etc
  • I feel that schools should stay k-8. I like the idea of keeping siblings together. I like the idea of having older kids looking out for younger children. I like having older children in an elementary school as role models for the younger children. I believe that middle schools make our children grow up faster than they need too. Middle school is hard enough. K-8 schools allow children to still be children. K-8 schools seem like more of a community. When you send your children to a school that they will be at for awhile you are making a commitment to that school. You get involved more. My children would have a hard time if IPS schools were to change. They are very happy at their k-8 school. Please make IPS schools stronger by making all K-8 schools the strongest.
  • Unnecessary socio-emotional stressors placed upon students and loss of special programming (e.g. Montessori, etc)
  • I want to make sure that Sidener Academy is not adversely impacted by this change. Sidener is the entire reason that our students and family moved into the district.
  • Kids should be able to finish k-8 in the same school. This disrupts siblings being together.
  • There is SUCH a significant developmental leap from 6th-8th grade, I really prefer to keep 6th graders with elementary school. I’d be tempted to pull my special-needs son out of public schools and find a smaller school environment for him.
  • Alienating local community and / or changing community involvement for programs that are doing well with k-8 programs.
  • Please reconsider! This is not a positive path forward. The mist successful programs in the district are in fact the K-8 schools.
  • So many. We will have to look for options outside of IPS if this happens.
  • Older children will not receive the benefits of being leaders for younger students, as is important to the Montessori model.
  • Realigning the grades would effectively dismantle the most economical (according to the Meeting 5 Small Group handout) model for IPS that is effective. IPS has substantial retention problems from 8th grade to high school. Unless this transition to middle schools was accomplished with efficiency and with the assurances that the quality of education would continue from elementary school to middle school (especially for choice schools), then IPS runs the risk of losing more students to non-IPS private schools. This would result in a spiral of funding loss.
  • Loosing students and giving parents of multiple children more challenges to get their students to schools.
  • Children don’t always move with each other to the next grade level building within IPS like they do in other school districts. For example a student in a township elementary is more likely to have the same peers along with new ones at that township’s middle school. At IPS schools they often move to schools in a different area of center township or to a different district when moving to a new graded school. Having schools with K-8 in IPS allows parents who see the importance of continuity of friendships and location to be able to choose those schools. This is one of the main reasons we chose the school we chose. It is currently K-8 and I really hope it stays that way. I’m honestly frustrated that it might not.
  • Children who struggle with transition due to mental health issues could struggle with moving into elementary to middle school buildings
  • I don’t have a specific concern. It would be nice to keep the k-5 and 6-8 near each other because several families have multiple kids in k-8 or k-6 and that could be a big problem for drop off.
  • Montessori is too different from traditional education to combine them and force the Montessori kids to change the way they learn to fit the more traditional way of teaching.
  • Reduce outcomes for students
  • There are many challenges and drawbacks. Don’t do it.
  • Kids getting moved around and having to make all new friends and learn how new schools work.. Sidener would not make any sense to do this with either. I really don’t understand how any school would work this way? If I want Herron prep I want it K-8 so why separate it. Same if I want CFI or whatever I don’t want to have to do the lottery for middle school and I don’t want to switch my kids to a whole new location and possibly a new school program as well. For us the k-8 seems like the best fit and one reason we picked the schools we picked please don’t make it harder to go to IPS. Many people move out of IPS district when kids start school…let’s not make it even harder to deal with the ever changing IPS school system.
  • I believe K-8 models create a more nurturing learning environment than bouncing the kids to another school for three years then bouncing again to high school. It seems like an unnecessary extra transition. The K-8 schools allow for extra leadership opportunities for the middle schoolers. I also believe it’s important for a large age range of kids to coexist in one building for the benefit of all the kids. It creates normalcy for being around a breadth of different kids, experiences, backgrounds, and ages. I like to think it helps younger kids be less intimidated by older children.
  • Larger groups of Middle School students foster larger behavioral issues. Changing school diminishes the sense of belonging or leadership that can be fostered in K-8 model.
  • Disrupting school communities; families having children at multiple different schools which will worsen transportation challenges and make it difficult to be fully engaged at all the schools their children attend. As a pediatric/adolescent health professional I also strongly hold that kids learn better in stable environments with faculty and staff that know them well to support them well- adding a school transition adds another point of instability. I am not supportive of this change.
  • Property is at a premium and I think money could be better spent raising salaries for teachers and school staff.
  • My son is a middle schooler at a K-8 building and is finally a leader in the community. The school has built in important traditions for him to feel this way including opportunities to work with and be a role model for younger students. Middle school is difficult enough without putting all of the angsty students together and teaching them a new structure. In my opinion, it would be a disaster and I would absolutely not keep my son in an IPS school. I am fortunate to be in a position to consider homeschooling as an option. One of the biggest challenges is that you would lose active parents and students. I do not support this transition at all.
  • I am a graduate of a IPS middle school. It was extraordinarily rough and it remained rough until we change the model several years back. K-8 makes so much more sense for kids, families, communities, and teachers. Our values must be aligned with stakeholders and not exclusively with bottom lines for a major decision like this. If the interest is in using buildings then just make more K-8 environments not middle schools.
  • I implore IPS leadership to grow this model. It was catastrophic when we last had MS programs and families don’t want that again. While I can see how MS programs would be beneficial to students in some ways, if parents don’t feel like the environments are safe or educational, they won’t send them. Our students deserve better. While our family would prefer K-8 programs (there is so much to be said for being in the same building and growing community for 9 years!!), if this is the option given, I would expect IPS to grow their MS programs one grade at a time. Start with 6th the first year, and then add a year each year those students rise until you have 6,7, 8 programs. By doing it this way, I think you’d get buy in from families that are reluctant, students will be able to learn routines/expectations, and you could GROW communities and not just throw them together.
  • I know that we need to make tough choices to improve, but I implore IPS to take into consideration what happened in the past, learn from this mistakes, and to have a thoughtful plan of action.
  • I also think the district should consider sharing this information with staff in a timely manner, well before they make a district announcement.
  • Also, I know the district has been working on this for a year, but families still get the impression that leadership had a plan in mind and would move that plan to fruition regardless of family/community input. I’d like IPS leadership to consider how we as a community could make that not seem so.
  • Bussing
  • In my experience, K-8 is a much better environment for our kids in almost every way
  • I don’t understand why it would be any issues besides maybe having so many select grade levels otherwise I believe this is such a great idea with there being such short staff teachers having similar aged kids in the same building will help so much. Younger kids will always want to be a part of the new move putting so many different ages creates chaos and gives some parents a form of uncertainty of their child’s safety and morals.
  • I believe more families will choose to leave IPS at the end of 5th grade or choose other k-8 charter/private options to begin with and skip IPS all together.
  • Unnecessary and Painful disruption of the children’s environment.
  • Loss of community/consistency for students, especially vulnerable populations
  • Many challenges. Parents in K-8s have been surveyed many times and desire the K-8 model. Losing k-8 may result in further loss of families in the district. Programs such as CFI build on the framework. An all IB middle school would be needed to funnel the PYP to the MYP.
  • Some schools may have a decrease in enrollment due to grades being moved out to other schools.
  • I think it invites some stress for students – would rather keep them in familiar surroundings and people thru 8th grade so they can learn to be leaders and have some comfort rather than starting “again” in a new place during a very transitional time of their life.
  • All previous models have been tried in the district. I attended Shortridge when it was just 7-8, then for a time it was 6-12. There are so many kids in a building at a crucial developmental stage that it was a lot to manage. What I think will happen, because it happened in the past, is that specialized programs will be introduced back into middle schools (performing arts, math science, humanities, IB, Montessori feeders) and kids that are in those programs will generally do really well compared to the general population of the school. Or there will be middle schools that get all the northside magnet school kids and you will still have huge disparities between middle schools with some over and some under performing. In a high poverty, diverse district like IPS the k-8 model provides the most opportunity for individualized learning and opportunities for all kids-especially because of the smaller middle schools. I also think it is a much better teaching experience for educators and helps retain middle school teachers. The middle school at 91 is a big part of why we chose the school-it is absolutely outstanding. Our kids do well wherever they attend high school. There have been plenty of opportunities at our school for district wide sports, clubs, and music. This is likely because of committed teachers, parents, and admin taking on extra roles. I also reviewed the excel spreadsheet and it seems that most of the k-6 buildings have space to add middle school. It would be incredibly helpful to fund a position for each k-8 that can support just extracurricular activities and sports-this would increase opportunity because the responsibility would not be on another full time teacher. We should use the education foundation to raise the money needed to support the right approachwhich in my opinion and experience is k-8 and 9-12.
  • The Montessori model is successful with streamlined K-8 instruction, multi grade classes, and a dedicated building for all grades. Separating the school into K-5 and 6-8 would disrupt a successful instructional model that serves students all the way through to starting high school.
  • Lack of or improper attention shown to students who are coping with a disability that need special attention. With the number of students per class we will need to have adjustments made to accommodate a potentially high performing child with special needs.
  • Childhood outcomes and consistency is better with a K-8 program
  • Disrupting existing programs working
  • This would be disruptive for building strong and lasting community, inside the building among the faculty and students, and outside the building with the families. It’s so valuable for The middle school students to see where they have come from as youngsters, and for the youngest students to truly see where they are headed. It goes against Montessori philosophy and the 3 year cycle which is very important to the method will be eliminated at upper elementary level
  • (Grades 4-6). Middle school is the perfect time to help Montessori students transition to a slightly more traditional model of instruction and that would be impossible with this proposal. Our Montessori school is only as strong as it is because we have our valuable middle school program within our school. I believe many families would leave IPS knowing this change would happen. They may leave earlier than they are now and send their students to private schools or out of district with this proposed change. One huge draw from families is knowing their students can attend our school from preK through 8th grade. The continuity and longevity is very important to them.
  • siblings in separate schools
  • For smaller neighborhood IPS schools (like school 57), the K-8 style is the attraction (not challenge) because it fosters diverse grade style learning by keeping larger family kids together longer; brothers and sisters going to school together verses spreading them across 3 schools.
  • Keeping the CFI programs for this older lids
  • I think it is important for younger kids to see modeled, appropriate behaviors from older children, and older children learn a great deal about patience, filtering, and responding to the younger kids. When done correctly, socioemotional developmental milestones for both groups of children can be reinforced. That said, I don’t know that I would consider what I see happening is beneficial for either group. Our experience last year showed acceptance and tolerance of abusive behavior within the same grades. If that isn’t addressed, there is no concern for how schools are structured.
  • I think middle school was a terrible and tough time, and think if you could stay at the same school until 8th grade it would be easier. I love that schools are K-8 it was a huge draw for us and we love our school.
  • Breaking up a school model and culture that already works really well. Specifically the school 91 Montessori model.
  • I think it is a POOR decision of IPS Superintendent to choose to dismantle working models that are in existence with IPS. K-8 Montessori works. School 91 is racially and economically diverse with high performing students.
  • A challenge is that you are dismantling working models and impacting lives of children and parents who were depending on a k-8, high performing model. My high-performing student will likely be leaving IPS if her current model of learning is dismantled. In addition, these surveys have been gaslighting in nature not really asking for true opinions, but asking questions in a way to get answers you want. The agenda of this administration is clear: You will pretend to get opinions and feedback, but it is quite clear you’ll do whatever you want despite parent and student objections.
  • Families will have little faith and trust in stand alone middle schools. In the current k-8 model, parents and guardians have such strong relationships within the school that the tender middle school years feel much less stressful when kids are in the same environment they grew up in. Parents will be devastated if these stand alone middle schools don’t continue on with their choice school curriculum, in our case the Montessori method, and will have a really hard time enrolling their kids in a traditional, large mainstream middle school. You will lose a lot of families who are currently enrolled in Choice schools. For many of these families, the choice was never between a Choice IPS school and another IPS option. The choice was between a Choice IPS school or private school or a school in another district.
  • Adding just an extra and unnecessary transition for students who are already currently thriving in the K-8 model.
  • Not involved with public schools
  • Addressing students’ developmental stage…
  • Separating siblings earlier and creating increased logistical issues for parents.
  • Finding qualified staff and stable schools
  • I can’t narrow it to just one. The loss of community, the loss of 6-8 students mentoring elementary students and elementary students striving to reach goals set by the 6-8 students, lack of family connection/interaction with the school because it is further from home, the loss of challenge for students working at/above grade level because teacher/school focus will be on those working to reach grade level. We left a great school (CFI27) because they simply couldn’t provide adequate challenge (especially in 6- 8 grades) for high ability students. My guess is that a change like this will mean many students will simply leave the district.
  • Younger more influential children falling to habits of other 13-14 year old children. Or my younger children being around behaviors of children going through puberty. They get that enough at home when they have to spend time with their own family. Let children be around children.
  • Staff issues and parents having issues with getting to multiple areas by transportation
  • Number of students in a school. Enough buildings in full operation with a full staff.
  • Increased problematic behaviors.
  • Busing/transportation
  • Not allowing enough time for the models to actually work.
  • parents would have less choice if they want their middle-schoolers in a smaller school environment
  • Parents of students in k-8 schools will not take this lightly. Their students are currently sheltered in small schools and they like that environment.
  • Spreading schools out so that transportation costs can be minimized (not bussing kids too far from their homes).
  • Parent buy in (change is hard and scary)
  • Teacher buy in (teachers will have to change buildings and move all their stuff)
  • 6th graders may be too immature.
  • K-8 buildings have small middle schools. The students often have the same teacher for their subjects across 6-8 which allows for relationship building and positive relationships lead to student success. In a larger middle school the students can become a number and lost in the shuffle.
  • I find it hard to believe both these goals can be done well together. The programs most people want replicated, to my knowledge, are K-8 schools. The building of relationships across all those grades is part of the success of programs. To split these programs, attempt to create desirable middle schools, and create more of the “popular” programs for elementary is too much for it all to be done well. I really think the district either need to focus on grade reconfiguration or replicating successful programs (I think replicating successful programs is probably better). I teach at a butler lab building and was there when we replicated: it is a very difficult and hard process and it does not just happen automatically. To do that and create some sort of middle school is stretching everybody too far.
  • Bussing. My athletic pay would also diminish. Keeping families together
  • Lose of connectivity between students and educators. Our program works at 91 and 87. Leave it alone
  • students/parents would undergo an adjustment period
  • N/A
  • Staffing
  • Historically those in 6-8s experience more achievement loss than those in these same grade levels that are in K-8 programs.
  • Having enough buildings to house the grade changes. The movement of faculty and staff. Also more buildings would be impacted by the state test.
  • It is taking away from the community of learners that is provided in a pre-k through 8th grade program. Parents who want the other programs have those options through Northwest and others. Our parents have selected our program, yes in some cases, maybe giving up on some things, but the continuation is what is BEST for the students. I have given 26 years to IPS building the middle school model and it has been a HUGE success. Why would we abandon something that has proven to be successful to be like other districts? I would be happy to sit down and discuss this more.
  • teachers will have to go to a different school to teach, or switch grade levels to stay at their school.
  • Logistically buildings (and staffing them) and transportation will need to be planned out well. The emotional maturity that some of our 6th graders have will be pushed putting them with older grades, too, so we need to make sure that we are providing SEL.
  • I don’t see a challenge, I’d love K-5 building.
  • Incorporating the sixth grade students into the existing 7-8 middle school culture in a way that is inclusion and age appropriate might be a challenge.
  • Yet one more change to navigate w/students, staff & families.
  • Students have been proven to have more success with fewer school transitions. Particularly at the middle school level, achievement gaps persist when students are thrust into a new learning situation after 6 years of elementary school, learning to transition from class to class, negotiate 7 different teachers’ expectations, all while they are navigating the often challenging social-emotional landscape of early adolescence. When middle school students are retained as a part of the K-8 continuum, they are still connected to their earlier grade teachers, (who they can lean on for support during challenging times), they know their peers already (because they’ve been through the earlier years of K-8 together) and they have the very important opportunity to grow into leadership roles as they serve as Book Buddies for younger elementary students and lead clubs and school-wide community meetings. Students would not got to experience these important leadership opportunities, and their social-emotional development would thus be hindered. The sense of belonging that students develop as part of K-8 learning community would be likewise be endangered by realigning to strictly K-5 and 6- 8 configurations.
  • Siblings attending different schools at different start and end times
  • None
  • This will take time and money.
  • Changing students’ and teachers’ schools.
  • One challenge will be the great teachers we have in our school teaching 6th grade
  • Eliminate unique opportunities
  • Part of the success in the programs that have k-8 configurations is that they are not changing and haven’t changed in 30 years (Montessori specifically). Montessori model proves that success is achieved through being able to go through the grades at one school and work up to being seen as a leader in the school. Without the middle school option in elementary schools—we will lose more parents to townships just for the fact that they don’t trust IPS after so many flip flops in the past decade or so. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
  • I believe the longer children stay in elementary settings the better. I also believe fewer transitions offer stability and many of our IPS students are transient. How does the 6-8 plan support those two thoughts?
  • Losing good teachers due to no place for them to go. A lot of us our now on edge because if our school changes to a middle school where will we go.
  • K-8 buildings do better with 6-8 students than traditional middle school configuration. K8 buildings build and maintain community at a critical point for our middle school students.
  • Losing all the benefits of K8 schools – middle school is a volatile time and students do better in K8 schools where they have built community. If anything, K8 should be expanded, not reduced.
  • N/A
  • I don’t know enough to contribute to this.
  • I think we will have parents not wanting students at so many different schools. It is possible that they could have students in three different schools.
  • Togetherness
  • Increased transitions for students
  • Leaving 9th with high. We should try or pilot K-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10-12
  • Families have made school decisions based on the current school configuration and changing that now would create uncertainty and challenges.
  • There is barely enough room for the 7th & 8th graders we have now! Adding 150 6th graders would make the building even more chaotic!
  • Montessori is successful as a K-8 model.
  • Kids going from school to school leaving friends behind
  • N\A
  • Loss of community and more transitions for children
  • The k-8 model is successful BECAUSE it is k-8. You cannot replicate something AND change it and expect it to have the same success. I don’t want this changed.
  • Losing the sense of comfort and familiarity that kids become accustomed to with a school. Starting another school at 6th grade could instill a sense of dread for the unknown and potential loss of friendships made over the last 6 years.
  • Loosing out on sense of community, loosing school mentors from senior age group, loose continuity & relationships around teachers and staff with student.
  • Our family likes the k8 model.
  • Logistics of kids at different school and the distance between school (ex, Butler lab #60 K-5 school distance from BLS 6-8 building- will schools be close to each other). I’m very concerned about the success of our high schools too. Am I going to have to figure out how to pay to send my kids to private high school?
  • Behavioral issues. Keeping them together allows the older students to take positive responsibility with the younger grades.
  • Inconvenient. I loved the idea of my children being at the same school for several years.
  • Initial confusion. Funding to make this happen.
  • IPS sees that these schools which they say are so successful have a K-8 model. It is successful because it supports the children who have their siblings nearby through a long day, and supports caregivers who are able to connect with one school. Schools already need additional parent involvement and engagement. Putting more on their plates with multiple schools, schedules, and staff only will separate the caregiver community further from the school. This benefits no one.
  • Further divides families and spreads them out across a massive district with transportation issues already. o Potentially closes schools, likely in already disadvantaged neighborhoods, causing further destabilization in those places. o Introduces a major transition/change at a formative and traditionally difficult age/time in a student’s life o Separates students from faculty and staff they’ve grown to know and be known by over the course of many years. o At a time of mental health crisis in this country, forces adolescent students into new environments where they aren’t as well known and creates opportunity for someone to “fall through the cracks”
  • People are resistant to change
  • Having facilities available and ready for middle school.
  • People often have difficulty & complaints transitioning to a new system
  • Losing the mentorship of upper grades with younger students, losing longer relationship
  • The challenge will be replicating successful schools, which are K-8, when you’re trying to remove the k-8 model. Don’t change successful school while you’re also trying to replicate them!
  • K-8 schools have proven to be successful. Kids are thriving. There are opportunities for leadership and it truly helps with difficult middle school years. Changing this would change everything and result in many families leaving IPS. You can’t replicate successful programs and also change grade configurations. That is changing what makes programs successful. Please replicate k-8 school that are successful on all side of the city. Leaving magnet schools on just the north side leads to inequity for all IPS students.
  • Many families have spent their life savings moving to be close to their preferred school. Changing the location of their child’s school without sufficient warning is unfair and punitive to families that have been supporting IPS.
  • All IPS communication is on cost saving but nobody is talking about fund raising. Raising more funds should be the number one objective in your plan. More focus should be put on major local businesses and government for not providing enough support to have a world class education system in our city.
  • This plan is going to force a lot of good middle class families to make some tough decisions. Many of them will choose to move to private schools, suburbs or surrounding townships if their child’s education is uncertain at IPS.
  • I have already started looking at other school options if my child’s school no longer has a grade 6-8 and I’ve had many conversations with other parents doing the same.
  • I want my students with the small school of k-8
  • All
  • The current configuration addresses the unique programs across the IPS offerings. K-8 works beautifully at the lab school because it’s thoughtfully designed. At a neighboring school, k-5, 6-8 might make better sense. Blanket approaches do not work in education. Having a variety of programs is appealing to parents and just makes good sense.
  • You can’t replicate successful programs if you change them so drastically. It won’t work. Please replicate k-8 school on all sides of the city so that all kids can access nontraditional educational models through IPS. There are so many of the north side and so few anywhere else. This is unfair.
  • Builds stronger interpersonal relationships between students, faculty, staff, etc., and provides opportunities for older students to mentor younger kids.
  • school community engagement in K-5 diluted by losing 6-8 families.
  • Massive inconvenience
  • I would leave IPS if these changes occur. I think IPS really needs to think long and hard about these decisions and how this would affect the so-called high performing schools – would these schools fail if parents withdrew from public school or moved??? Then its IPS back at square one trying to prevent white flight.
  • More bullying, less continuity, lower academic achievement, less family involvement with middle schools, leadership opportunities for older kids, continuity of the teaching philosophy (Reggio, IB, Montessori).
  • We strongly prefer K-8 for our family.
  • IPS can act as a dynamic leader of surrounding districts and not chop up existing class growth flow. A k-8 school allows for building life long friendships as well as give kids a sense of family, support, and security.
  • I think there are many challenges. Most importantly, it is harder to build community with an increased number of families — having ~45-50 families per grade allows for great community building. As the number increases, the distances from the school increases, and it is harder to build community without walking to school and meeting other families. More families will have students in multiple buildings, which divides attention for community building and makes it more difficult on parents. Students are adversely affected by attending middle vs. K-8 schools according to data from Cappella, West, and others. I would like to see more K-8 schools open in neighborhoods for walkability and community.
  • Providing stability. Our kids have been through the ringer these last few years with Covid. My daughter has developed close relationships with multiple teachers over the last few years. She enjoys being able to swing by and say hello to her kindergarten teacher. She’s had the same music teacher and is in a club with the teacher and is looking forward to taking a leadership role when she is in 8th grade and helping the 4th graders the way she was helped. The school has a sense of community and the middle schoolers play a large role in it. That community won’t be readily available to her if she has to switch schools.
  • Our family will also definitely look into what our other options are for middle school outside of IPS, especially if it gets implemented next year.
  • Students may have to ride a bus across town to attend a school, and many established school communities will be broken up. We depend a lot on the older kids in our neighborhood to help walk younger siblings/neighbors safely to and from school. It is also very nice to have many of their friends/classmates living close by for after school/weekend play opportunities.
  • I would miss my kids small middle school. I think so parents of their friends (a butler la school) would leave the district. We would not, but I think some parents would to want to send their kids to a “big” middle school
  • My kids would have to switch buildings for middle school which we really don’t want. We absolutely love the feeling of community at k-8 schools.
  • More parents may have children at multiple schools, which could cause transportation conflicts or work schedule conflicts for student pick up and drop off.
  • We love the inquiry, relationship based approach at IPS 60. Would be concerned about losing that approach in a more traditional middle school.
  • Rushing to a solution. I don’t hate the idea but really hope IPS is thoughtful and takes the time to do it right.
  • It breaks apart neighborhood schools that have just started to create footing in communities. How long has the current model been in place? Has there even been enough time to ACTUALLY study what is best for the children? Will the middle schools be divided by choice schools as well- 1 single montessori Middle school, 1 Butler lab, 1 CFI? How will there be enough Montessori middle school teachers to accommodate this when 2 of my child’s teachers quit mid year. Will buses be more available?
  • Transportation costs, changing pedagogical philosophies, teachers, friends, & surroundings at a very pivotal age has been shown to be detrimental for kids, ire from lots of parents who signed their kids up for one thing & got a ‘bait & switch’ instead… I could write a thesis on how stupid it would be to realign the school grade structure. This state sucks for kids, families and most of all, for our underpaid teachers.
  • We know there is success with the k-8 model. We don’t need to align with other districts on this. Why create an unnecessary transition during the hardest years of a kids life as they begin puberty?? K-8 is a large reason I kept my kids in district as well as many other families that I know.
  • It is moronic, foolish, inconvenient, shortsighted, and wrong
  • What to do about families that selected a school partially bc it is on the k-8 model? Like us 🙂
  • It will cause significant challenges for current, high performing K-8 schools, the Montessori schools in particular – their extremely thoughtful process of honoring montessori principles while preparing students for more traditional high school experiences will be completely lost and will cause more hardship for 6-8 grade students when those are difficult enough ages.
  • Having parents want all children at different schools. However, if they knew what their younger children were seeing or hearing, they would be on board.
  • I would be sad to not see a set of grades that I’m used to seeing.
  • Transportation
  • Transportation. How are you going to address this? Parents will want to know and we know that it is already an issue
  • Busing/ Transportation.
  • I don’t see one.
  • You will be breaking up families and transitioning many students to new buildings, which is always difficult.
  • Years ago when we had more k-5 & 6-8 buildings, our middle schools were very low performing. A big benefit of the k-8 model is the small middle school and therefore stronger relationships between staff and students.
  • Reconfiguring the schools that are in K-8 right now, but it could work if programs stay the same and split between buildings. For example, if Butler Lab #60 took all of the elementary students from both lab school programs and Butler Lab #55 took all the middle school students from the programs. Similar configurations could be made for CFI schools. #2 being elementary and #27 being middle school, but both following the CFI models.
  • The k-8 model is a unique feature in the city and why a lot of families have chosen the schools. We would never have chosen IPS if it was k-5
  • Moving children to more buildings from K-12 does not solve any academic issue facing the district.
  • The challenge is what I alluded to above. If the district wants to realign the CFI program specifically (or any of the other programs), there need to be assurances that doing so won’t change the quality of the education that students in these schools are expected to be receiving under the current status quo.
  • It’s wrecking what’s working
  • It’s a terrible idea, please do not realign the grades.
  • Losing the community of our school, including the excellent role modeling that our older middle school students provide for younger students. It might also increase the school size/lesson the sense of community if each grade enrolls more students.
  • You’ll be taking kids out of a smaller school environment where many of them have grown up and are known by the teachers and staff, and throwing them into a large school where they will be one of dozens/hundreds of kids each staff member sees every semester. And you’re doing it at a time in their lives when they are especially vulnerable
  • middle school is probably the most awkward and at risk time for young people to start down the wrong path. Example – who will see my 6th grader and know her well enough to recognize when she’s struggling with life and could use some kindness instead of detention?
  • Also, almost every single one of the successful schools you want to expand is a K-8 school. It is a part of the formula for success. DO NOT DO THIS.
  • Older siblings supporting younger siblings
  • Giant Middle Schools did not work before
  • I went to K-8 and then Tech for high school. I felt well prepared for high school and like I’d had more 1-1 attention to prepare myself. My 2 older brothers (also IPS alums who went to Tech) did not do as well after coming out of the larger middle schools (Harshman and Shortridge). I felt like a leader in my school, getting to do special assignments like reading to the younger kids, helping take kindergartners to the buses, making art projects around the school and so on. I went on to graduate with my bachelors in nursing and now a Masters in nursing and feel the magnet programs (CFI and health professions at Tech) really aided me in my future success.
  • The retention of our best teachers will be very hard during the transition process and this makes me the most nervous since staff members have become comfortable with their schools/grade levels. This would potentially force staff that have the credentials to change their grade level (if possible) to stay at their school and with their administration, or move to a new building under a new administration and team which could drive many strong educators away from the district.
  • Having kids at 3 different schools, not being able to successfully replicate programs/curriculums at high achieving schools, wasting valuable instructional time while the district navigates this transition, only using existing middle school buildings that are not in reasonable proximity to our home.
  • Families with multi kids have to go between multiple schools Dan is less efficient and time consuming
  • family schedules thrown off with different start/end times. transportation, neighborhood school for my family. keeping my kids in CFI schools.
  • Not a lot of variety of ages
  • Parents would need to determine how to get siblings to two different schools (hopefully there would be staggered start times).
  • location logistics changes for families
  • I like that the older kids in CFI can do things to help the younger kids. I feel like this would be missed
  • Buildings being shifted, and children being unable to remain in the same building for an extended period. I appreciate our K-8 school in that the kindergarteners and the middle school students interact.
  • Cfi is so important and these kids only have that option through 8th grade they should be able to stay there
  • It is very beneficial for our kids to have interaction with older students and I think it is also great that they get to spend their entire elementary school experience in one building.
  • Disrupting current approach
  • Stressing out kids and parents with making more school choices.
  • Loss of sense of community which will result in more families leaving the district.
  • The less time we have to spend in the lottery, the better. The lottery was stressful, and caused us to consider private school or even moving, if a favorable school wasn’t assigned. Now that we are in CFI, I’m currently relieved that I don’t have to rethink the school choice until high school. I personally attended the same school from k-12 and appreciated the consistency and deep relationships.
  • The opportunity for interation with primary and middle years programs is invaluable. The older kids get to teach and assist the younger students and the younger students get to learn and see what opportunities are waiting for them in the middle years programs. The teachers also instruct many levels so I worry that there won’t be a variety of programs offered if there aren’t that many students in the building/school. What funding would be cut because there aren’t enough students to justify keeping a program-band, choir, art, etc.
  • Students greatly benefit from attending one school K-8. Having students’ educations interrupted and losing the school home that they’ve known for the first six years of their education would be traumatic and would weaken all of the school buildings. This is a terrible idea, second only to IPS’ “innovation schools.” Tell me, if money weren’t a factor, would you even be considering this? If money is the only driving reason, then you know it’s a bad, bad idea.
  • changing schools at a young age (from elementary to middle school) is very disruptive
  • None
  • I don’t want to reapply to schools. I like walking my child to school. I don’t want the problems associated with larger middle schools. If I had a kid in high school now they would NOT stay in IPS. I think you should focus on improving your high schools before realigning grades and beginning new schools with mediocre planning and results. If you realign grades you will lose many families from district schools. We will leave for middle school if this is the choice.
  • Identifying how to break up schools as currently composed.
  • We did this in other districts we lived, and it is atrocious in terms of social stability, the peer pressure is loads worse in separate middle schools. The K-8 model was something we moved to IPS specifically for, but now I’m not sure we will stay of these changes to the schools go into effect. It will only serve to increase issues related to equitable access, transportation, available specials in all these new schools, etc.
  • Will my child still go to a CFI? Will they still be with their peer group or get split? I don’t understand how they elementary schools will feed into the intermediate schools. Also, it’s a logistical challenge to have 2 kids at 2 different places. Staying k-8 reduces the amount of years we are split between two schools.
  • I don’t see any as transportation is provided
  • See above. I don’t think any small pros outweighs the cons of a separate middle school
  • There would have to be another lottery for middle school. This would mean more issuers with transportation as well. We live a half block from IPS 70 so it is very convenient for us to walk there.
  • 1. Surrounding districts are not as Urban and fragmented as IPS, and thus lend themselves better to the elementary and middle school specific model. Implementing this model in IPS will lead to kids spending a lot more time on buses, when they could be learning. Because they will have to travel further in inner city traffic to reach the consolidated school buildings. 2. It will not be as neighborhood friendly, or as conducive to the children building relationships with each other: The magnet schools are successful because of the proximity zones. If you have a high percentage of local children attending, then they will encounter their friends out side of school locally. If these children scatter to the wind after elementary school to middle schools this neighborhood aspect is lost. It’s not like less urban surrounding districts where children move from an elementary school to a middle school together, because the schools cannot be consolidated as easily (See point 1 above). 3. You are introducing another lottery for the middle schools, and another source of stress for parents AND children. It’s one thing explaining to a child who is entering a school district for the first time that they cant go to the same school as friend ‘x’, but they will make new friends. But doing this again, at middle school age, when they are already in the school system and have established relationships, will be extremely traumatic. See point 2 above why this problem doesn’t exist in surrounding less urban districts where lotteries do not exist and children progress through a school system without ‘lottery’ restrictions. 4. Their is a wealth of neighborhood private school options surrounding the high performing magnet schools. These neighborhoods contribute to the successful IPS schools precisely because parents are involved in, and conscientious about their children’s education. These schools are the competition for the high performing IPS magnet schools, and they are not about to transition to a middle school specific model. I believe talking to other parents that if this model is implemented, many parents will have reduced interest in their children attending IPS due to all the issues elaborated in points 1 through 3 above and reconsider private schooling. The net result will be that IPS loses out on these conscientious and involved parents and what they bring to the school system.
  • Whilst I understand the motivations behind this solution, I believe it to be misguided. I understand that their is backlash about the perceived ‘privilege’ some children receive having proximity priority for high performing magnet schools. But I think this ‘solution’ introduces more problems than it solves.
  • how will the realignment look? will choice schools have specific middle schools? my challenge is the number of questions I have regarding any potential change.
  • I think there is a greater likelihood of losing students from the district during the transition from elementary to middle school
  • If this requires yet another lottery process for students entering grade 6, this will undoubtedly frustrate many families. The lottery has winners and losers. For families that do not feel comfortable with their school placement after the lottery process, they may choose private schools instead. Also, it is not clear how having separate middle schools will actually increase diversity at CFI programs. To expand diversity in CFI schools, IPS should promote CFI programs to neighborhoods of color that are not far from CFI schools (like Crown Hill, neighborhoods around state fairgrounds, etc). IPS/CFI should work to create a partnership with diverse neighborhoods in order to attract students beyond the proximity zones.
  • I think that the K through eight program has show tremendous benefits for children with consistency with teachers and education it would be ashamed of IPS changes
  • Placing more kids of the same age in one place is not a solution. They don’t model after older kids nor do they mentor younger children. My wife is teacher and we believe consolidation is the worst thing for high attendance schools .
  • Need to maintain the specialty program (eg CFI) throughout and make sure CFI k-5 are ensured they can continue in 6-8. Also need to keep schools as neighborhood schools. I’m not putting my child on a bus for an hour to go to CFI 6-8 when our current k-5 CFI is within a minute of my house.
  • I believe you would lose a lot of middle school aged kids from the CFI to private/other districts….we lose some already at this level and combining or relocation could cause more to leave. We are at CFI 84 and have basically no kids go to IPS high schools. If you want to retain the smart kids that can afford private schooling through middle school, I would consider keeping the current model. I could be wrong and it might be fine, but our neighborhood bubble school where everyone’s walks and knows each other is a beautiful thing.
  • It will drastically change the experience for middle schoolers. Middle schoolers in the K8 schools seem to stay young and innocent longer. I appreciate this! There is no rush to grow up too fast. There is a sweet sense of community in k-8 schools which appeals to our family greatly and is a reason we didn’t send our daughter to Washington township. We have a seventh grader and I will be so sad if she can’t graduate from her current school and completing her CFI IB education.
  • This is further disruption in our kids education center it’s Covid they have been through enough disruption.
  • Switching schools more often/more disruption for students. Less mentorship to younger students from older ones
  • Breaking up successful schools/major disruption
  • Kids at different schools
  • Chaos moving kids from one school to another. Kids in same family would have multiple drop off/pick ups causing logistic problems.
  • More uncertainty is introduced if a child isn’t guaranteed a spot in the middle school with the same program
  • Having kids at different schools that start at different times. I think having 6-8 with younger kids helps them to build leadership skills and encourages better behavior.
  • My child is currently in a K-8 program at CFI, and we selected it specifically because of the CFI program. If IPS were to remove that option, we would want to have a CFI MYP experience for him.
  • In reading on this some it appears these is an academic decline in 6-8 graders who transition to new schools. I prefer the K-8 model for development and the safety of a known environment for learning.
  • Students may end up with longer commutes to/from school
  • I think the community established in a K-8 school is essential to student development and cannot be achieved in the same manner through K-5 and 6-8 schools. Realigning the grades would also increase the change in environment for kids.
  • Kids going from learning environments that they’re thriving in, to a larger mix of students with less qualified leadership—keep the schools smaller and focus on hiring qualified leaders for underperforming schools—leadership and parent involvement are key. Without those two items programs like CFI, Butler Lab School and others will underperform.
  • People will leave the district if change occurs too quickly. Also, most worrisome, is if reform of K-5 doesn’t occur, then the integration and attempt to facilitate a school community will be too late. If we focus too much on making room/bringing more kids to certain schools, we are not honoring what could be the most special thing for IPS – location and walkability. Location/proximity to each school is a huge factor in improving the comradeship of a school, the camaraderie is what keeps kids in school, and could be this way no matter the area. Once kids are in school, our great teachers can do their jobs which ultimately leads to more success. I propose we 1) continue research on the k5 and 6-8 separation and create a long term plan to better serve that age group and 2) look at location/proximity as a positive aspect for IPS, a means to determine allocation of resources, and a way to improve parent and student engagement and pride in their neighborhood school.
  • Splitting up families into different schools
  • It does not allow for the same type of community building and ability for parents to commit to IPS through 8th grade (rather than going private) that I believe makes choice schools so popular and successful.
  • We chose our school partially because of the K-8 model. Breaking that up during my children’s school career would be devastating to our family and would likely cause us to leave. IPS tried this model in the past and switched because it was not working. After the last 2 years of school during a pandemic, why on earth would you look to make such a huge change to our school system? Let our children settle back into a normal school life before forcing yet another change on them. This is very poor timing and not thought through enough.
  • Too many teachers per grade! 2-teacher teams like our choice programs have now make project-based learning and field trips easier to plan. With 3+ classes per grade it’s harder to manage funds, supplies, and planning for these types of educational experiences. Less differentiating and individualizing happens when teachers are expected to all teach in tandem. Keeping K-8 buildings helps kids experience a small-school feel even though they are in a huge district. Kids feel more like numbers when there are so many kids per grade.
  • Disruption of kids already at k-8 schools.
  • Many of us chose schools based on the current configuration and do not want a change in the middle of our children’s education
  • Does not allow continuity of the wholistic educational experience in the same way that can be achieved in K-8 within one building. With more grades together I’m the same building, this allows for the resources (teachers, students, physical resources, facilities) to provide differentiation opportunities. Also, families with multiple children spanning in age can have one school that they’re working with for a longer period, one community, rather than 2-3 different drop offs, school schedules, etc. this can be extremely challenging for parents to manage.
  • breaking apart a successful school doesn’t mean what’s created will be successful
  • How is transportation going to work? My kids can’t take a bus as it is because we live too close to the school; never mind they have to cross Kessler without a crossing guard since we cannot get a bus.
  • I’ve not heard anything positive about the current transportation’s efficiency as it was this past year. Now you want to shuffle everyone around the city? What a mess. This will lead to MORE time students aren’t in a classroom learning thanks to unreliable transportation.
  • Shuffle everyone around and NO ONE has the opportunity to walk or bike to school safely.
  • Again, let the wonderful communities and families that have built ties over the years continue to do so by KEEPING K-8 schools. We feel a part of the community, neighborhood and school because it’s K-8.
  • Realigning grade configuration will mean parents who have the means to send their children to private schools in the area will likely do so. Neighbors in our K-8 community CHOOSE K-8 school opportunities; it allows children to be children in a nurturing, loving environment. It allows middle school students to build bonds with younger students. It allows families to build community for the long-haul, not just a few years. THAT’S what building back better is all about; not just making changes in the midst of 2+ years of crisis for our children who don’t recall what a normal school experience is.
  • Clearly, I have strong opinions about this and am happy to share more thoughts. I’m an educator myself who chose to send my own children to a K-8, neighborhood school, despite them being able to go to a top-ranked school district in the state. It is more important for our family to build community in our neighborhood, through our K-8 school, than attend a suburban district.
  • This will make things incredibly difficult for our family, given the 5 year age gap between my three children.
  • The lottery system is stressful and I’d like not to have to try to get my child into a school that is right for her again for middle school. We are very happy with CFI 84 and would like to stay there as long as possible.
  • Splitting up children from the same family into different buildings
  • Constant uncertainty. For our family with two daughters just starting out at IPS (7 and 4 years old), our family will constantly be worrying about the upcoming lotteries into these new, untested schools. My 7 year was in a lottery for the current system, would be in a lottery for whatever the new configuration is for grade school, a lottery for middle school, and a lottery for high school. They will be far enough apart in age that they will not benefit from the sibling match for middle school, so there is the potential for no consistency between their two middle school experiences. So, instead of being able to go to an established K-8 at a school that is 2 blocks from the home my wife and I have lived in for 12 years, they will be IPS test subjects bouncing from newly established IPS grade and middle schools until they might finally be at the same high school for one year.
  • realignment is pointless and feels like an arbitrary move not based on the mental and educational welfare of the children. k-8 is a better long term environment for our child. the 6-8 graders mentor the younger kids and the younger kids benefit from that modelling of behavior. It also cuts down on the amount of anxiety and ambiguity that going to middle school brings to kids that age since a) she would have grown up and gone to school with the same kids and b) its a community focused school.
  • I also hear from the high schools that the CFI k-8 programs develop students that are more ready to learn and better adjusted than those who come from a middle school environment. Please don’t realign the grades!”
  • Losing the opportunity for middle school students to guide & mentor younger grades. Practicing & modeling leadership roles, responsibilities, & accountability in this way is confidence-building for older students and inspiring for younger students. It offers a sense of value, importance, & belonging for middle school students, an anchor / grounded-ness for an age group that is finding their way in life as they transition to young adults and high school. allowing siblings to remain together at one school as long as possible
  • Specifically cfi school 2 should be kept k thru 8.
  • We feel our children would have a greater chance at excelling if they were able to stay at their CFI2 school until 8th grade is completed. It would be a huge challenge on so many levels to have to change schools after 5th grade. We beg you to not make this change! Location is important, confidence is built, friendships are formed and relationships with their teachers are so important. The longer the students can stay at a school, increases the likelihood that these things happen.
  • We are at a CFI school and would want a CFI middle school education like we thought we would be getting. My concern would be that it would follow a more traditional model of middle school which is not what we were looking for.
  • Middle school years are challenging enough without the transition to a larger, unfamiliar place without the peers that they’ve been with up until that point. Furthermore, for schools with an IB curriculum that extends to grade 8, how would that be handled?
  • We love that 84 is so close to our house and that so many of our neighbors attend the school as well. The grade realignment would likely send children to schools further away and with multiple children at different schools, it makes logistics more tricky.
  • Kids having to move to several schools. I love that my kids will only go to two buildings (elementary and high school), both of which are currently walkable for us and why we chose these schools.
  • See answer above. I would much prefer more k-8 models, and it is one of the reasons we decided to stay with Cold Spring, as it has expanded to k-8. It is more supportive, better for families of multiple children.
  • Students and families would lose the cohesion and sense of school community they have built if at 6th grade they are not t all allowed to stay together at a nearby school. Requiring a reapplication period for 6th would mean they likely get split up. I think that would really be detrimental to everyone involved.
  • One of the reasons it was shifted to the way it is was maturity of 6th graders and being with older students. Is that no longer a concern? If it is then how is that going to be accounted for?
  • Big shift and transition
  • Unreasonable fears that parents will have about their students safety in larger, more unfamiliar schools. “Change” itself will be a challenge for IPS parents in this particular area of the district. Many of these choice programs are safe spaces because they are small, and not diverse. Parents will likely feel compelled to flee the district after elementary, instead of after 8th grade as is typical now. 6-8 programs will need to be carefully curated and “sold” to families to keep them in the district. However, I think middle schools will in the end help retain those students into high school if done right.
  • Different schools would mean splitting up my kids at different schools
  • When transportation isn’t available, I have to take our grand child to school, separating our grand kids would be more strain on us. Further, there are a limited number of schools available. I feel that this should not change.
  • It would be hard to transition the students out.
  • Discipline in middle schools -disruption “restart” again
  • It’s super convenient when you have multiple children in the same building, also I like that by the time you reach middle school in a K-8 building, you know all the staff and they know you. That is really comforting and helps in many ways.
  • Worse for working parents dropping off at different schools or dealing with multiple bus and school times.
  • Siblings at different school and different hours
  • Siblings Not get preference on neighborhood schools if older sibling is in middle school
  • Where to begin? The history of trying to urban middle school instruction throughout Indiana? The specific IPS challenges of doing so? The only good middle school experiences IPS offers now are within the context of a community of k-8 model. You propose to end all of those, naively thinking that you can simply recreate that same feel in stand alone middle schools? That is either hubris or follow, or both. You would also destroy the few functioning school communities where staff have built cultures and start from scratch. Simply put, after destroying nearly all of traditional high school by myopic board decisions within the last five years, your new proposal is poised to ruin middle school, too. Please realize this is not the step forward for IPS.
  • The building capacity-does the district have building space for multiple middle schools? I’d like to see the model support 4-6 middle schools depending on numbers (600/700) students per school. I’m not sure the numbers warrant the number of total schools. I also see challenges regarding the choice and innovation schools. If there isn’t a middle school option for those schools, parents will likely look to surrounding township, charter or private schools.
  • A middle school model will not work if the purpose is just to financially move bodies for the benefit of buildings and space. There needs to be a clear purpose, a true commitment to a program with more support than we already have, and extremely strong leadership. I also have concerns about mixing the teaching philosophies. I do believe that keeping the IB model would be a way to encompass the different philosophies and give a common purpose and direction. This would be a way to create a successful school model, but there would need to be a huge initiative to onboard teachers and staff. If a school is opened up and students and teachers are thrown together without preparation, it will not work. I believe a middle school team needs to be given time before the school opens to create curriculum and essential goals before opening the school. As an IPS middle school teacher, I would love to talk more with IPS leadership about how we can make this school successful.
  • You have multiple (6+ locations) that are currently k-8 and have very specific programming, how will we be able to ensure those children are able to continue their current programming, i.e. will we create CFI/Butler Lab middle schools, how will the feeding process work if that’s the case? It seems if we went to the current lottery system for middle school there would be a high number of current IB/Reggio kids who would lose their seats in these programs. Speaking from an IB perspective, specifically, there is a heavy community component to their learning at having the PYP and MYP programs in the same building help fuel this.
  • Loosing students at the transition years in middle school and high school
  • Large schools with an enormous amount of students does not create a positive intimate environment for growing young children to develop relationships and focus on academic learning. Besides, who really liked middle school in the tradition 6-8 format? I’ve never met anyone who liked that. There is time for that kind of environment, it’s called high school.
  • The k-8 schools have a track record of kids doing well and being prepared for high school. Having spent time in the middle schools, I don’t believe that the current middle schools are providing the same level of education as the current k-8 programs.
  • Transportation
  • Ips enrollment for middle school would decline drastically as students from high performing schools would look to private schools or schools from other districts.
  • It will take some readjustment on the teachers and students parts, but any kind of change takes readjustment. I think moving to a K-5 and 6-8 grade structure throughout the district would be very beneficial.
  • I have taught at a k-8 school, a 7-12 school, and a 6-8 school. I think that the k-8 program is actually the best for middle schoolers because it provides extra stability and a feeling of community. It also makes it easier for families with elementary and middle school students. I think a lot of middle school students at the lab school stay because of their younger siblings and because their families already like the school. If they had to go to a different school I think their families would choose to go out of the district. This would worsen the retention that choice schools currently have without building it at the neighborhood schools.
  • Having positive mentors for younger ones, having older children understanding that they are leaders to those younger than them therefore encouraging them to do better. My daughter has loved the k-8 model and it has made her into a more responsible individual.
  • Listening to the midtown parents complain that they might be inconvenienced with their “private public schools”
  • The current model is working why take away from it. Some k-8 is a smaller setting why put our kids in bigger classroom sizes
  • Separating siblings into different buildings, lack of community, the strain of a huge transition like this on our students’ learning
  • Potentially forcing parents to go through the lottery system again when they were under the impression they didn’t have to
  • Changing schools and having to try to get into the school we want again
  • Separate middle schools lead to poorer attendance, test scores, self esteem, etc.
  • SO MANY challenges. You have had this model in past. It DID NOT work. What makes you think this time will be different? It won’t. Where will you put these students? If you think housing a middle school in a half empty high school will be a good option you are wrong. 6-12 on same campus is an awful idea. How will you keep the current IB programs as they are? Will there be a CFI specific middle school or will it be a program housed with everything else (which loses the appeal) – biggest challenge may be retaining your high performing students who are currently at your K-8 buildings. We don’t want this and will exit IPS at middle school level for a more stable program. People with the means will leave (as they did before – and continue to do since you reorganized your HS programs again.) Teachers included. They don’t want the change either and will find open positions elsewhere leaving IPS with a building full of subs or semi qualified educators to fill those vacancies. Ridiculous.
  • In smaller schools, K-8 allows school communities to grow together over more years adding stability and continuity for students as well as mentorship opportunities among students.
  • The privileged parents being grumpy about this and throwing their privilege around. Stand up for equality and make this change.
  • Less consistency for students who have already had to deal with 2-3 years of uncertainty in their schooling, having to leave a location that may be closer to people’s homes, less of an opportunity for older students to demonstrate leadership and for younger students to learn from older students, taking students out of environments where they have bonded with peers and educators
  • I do not believe schools should be realigned. Other districts are able to have this model because their k-5 schools are of the same model. Combining CFI, butler lab, etc kids into one school would cause too much variance in education levels. This would cause a further exodus of parents to surrounding suburbs. All schools need to be fixed first to the same education level before this step should be taken. Please call or email to discuss further. Thanks.
  • Space to accommodate all MYPs and finding enough qualified teachers (ie specials and foreign language teachers) as we can’t find staff to currently fill those positions.
  • Needing to do the lottery again for middle school
  • Lack of consistency for students, more change for students, harder for families to keep track of students over the years, and potentially puts older students in situations they aren’t ready for.
  • I don’t want to lose the strong IB program that we have with CFI. I would want their to be an IB specific middle school, and I am hoping this option would not mean having to go through another round of a lottery.
  • A massive amount of families will leave the district for middle school and likely 4/5 to secure spots in neighboring public/private schools for middle school.
  • Lack of funding for additional schools
  • making sure kids get into schools close to home
  • I really do not like this idea! IPS has a great opportunity to shape kids and instill confidence in the current model. Kids can be at the same school as their siblings and have the experience of becoming leaders. One of the main reasons we chose IPS was because of the k-8 model. The middle school experience does not appeal to us at all! Give 7th and 8th graders a chance to be leaders in the school!
  • Many parents chose K-8 schools because they were K-8. We are trying to keep our young teens grounded and behaving appropriately.
  • This would create bigger schools where more at risk children will fall through the cracks. The K-8 model is popular because it’s intimate and better teacher-student interaction. The students gain social emotional and mental health benefits as well as reap stronger academic progress and teachers have less students
  • The destruction of already established and thriving communities such as CFI schools. Our family benefits from the wide age range.
  • Splitting up families and communities already built within the school.
  • We chose IPS for the K-8 model and the prodigy of the K-8 school to our home. If popular choice programs are expanded to other areas of the city, where will middle schools for each program be located?
  • Ensuring specialty programs continue through middle school.
  • It would be difficult for parents who chose a school particularly because it was k-8 to support their child’s needs.
  • Transportation
  • What happens to my soon-to-be middle school Montessori child? Is there a montessori middle school?
  • A primary concern is the quality and safety of the middle school experience. When the district moved to virtually eliminate middle schools not that many years ago, the middle schools were almost uniformly low-performing. I haven’t heard anything from the district to indicate what would be done to assure that we don’t end up in the same situation again. Also, although I recognize that some students really benefit from the choice and freedom of the stand-alone middle school experience, some students in grades 6-8 thrive in the more intimate, nurturing atmosphere of a K-8, and deserve to have that choice. Also, what would become of the middle school piece of programs like IB and Montessori? That also has not been shared publicly,
  • No doubt higher costs to implement, with no immediately obviously added value.
  • For a lot of people the biggest issue seems to be the typical IPS fashion of just springing huge changes on large groups of people. For the most part it makes sense but for so many that is not what they “signed up for” so giving people a couple years to say this is what we are changing to in say 2024/25 school year, people will have time to make moves/changes/decisions on what they think is best for their student and how they’ve been prepared vs just a quick change.
  • Unless the building is on the same grounds, the change could impact access/vicinity for all families and may or may not be considered equitable. Having older and younger students in the same building or on the same grounds provides endless opportunities for older students to be more involved in, and positively influential to the younger grades. Acclimating to a completely new environment during some of their most developmentally challenging years can be unnecessarily stressful for students.
  • I like the small k-8 community. Our kids are 5 years apart in age so they would be at the same school longer under the current model. I would also miss the opportunity younger elementary kids have to see positive role models in the older middle school kids.
  • Disruption to families and students in already difficult ages
  • I can’t think of any.
  • Needing more administrators to accomplish the goal of focusing more on each age/maturity group.
  • Destroying the ability for our children to attend local school they can walk to. Sense of community at CFI84 will be lost.
  • Recreating the quality experience at a smaller k-8 school at a large middle school will be difficult
  • People do not want change – especially in high performing schools
  • Parents with multiple aged children
  • Families having kids in multiple schools -older kids don’t get the benefit of interacting with younger kids and vice versa -alters the community of the school to be less wellrounded -middle school aged kids get so much leadership opportunity to work with the younger grades and lead all-school initiatives.-Families would be less connected with switching schools at 6th grades.
  • When we enrolled our oldest at the BLS #60, a significant consideration was the K-8 model. While that was ten years ago, I have not seen any recent data/research that supports traditional a elementary/middle school model being better for students academically/socially. More specifically, when we joined the BLS, a major talking point was K-8 model helps prevent the academic/social “drop off” seen in most traditional middle schools…citing many students never bounce back after falling behind in a traditional middle school setting. What has changed from a teaching and learning perspective? Are you able to share the data IPS is using to support reverting back to K-5 and 6-8 buildings? On a related note, the question above seems to be biased by suggesting an alignment with surrounding districts is a positive move. We don’t see it that way…
  • There is cross-grade support I see in our K-8 with the middle school students setting amazing examples for the younger children. The older kids also get a highly necessary sense of stability and security while going through those typically challenging middle school years.
  • Lose the small school community. One of the many reasons we chose the school we are at.
  • Aligning School partnership for transition grades
  • Multiple siblings being in different locations is a burden to parents.
  • Would parents choose to keep their kids in the schools if they knew they might not be in that school from K-8? IPS might lose students. It is really helpful for families to have kids in the same schools for as long as possible.
  • Loss of the value of elementary versus middle school interaction which has been proven beneficial for both groups. We have chosen a k-8 for this reason. It also helps with the SEL of middle schoolers and provides them with early leadership opportunities. For families with multiple kids, it is a challenge to have kids in different buildings (across town!) and remain active. Parents of K-8 have a better opportunity for serving the school community longer.
  • There are many students currently in K-8 schools that would struggle with an abrupt change.
  • Current middle school only offerings are not as strong as K8 options, so it’s a concern if that persists.
  • It disrupts communities.
  • School bus issue, siblings separated, reduced number of IPS schools within our area
  • Ensuring students leaving high demand/ high-performing schools will have the same opportunities in the new schools. Please do not realign the grades!!!
  • We lose the mentorship and the community feel
  • The mentor / mentee relationships between K – 5 and middle schoolers in the K – 8 schools is invaluable.
  • Would we need to lottery in to a CFI school again if we are already at CFI? When we got a spot at CFI, we thought we would not need to seek another school until High School. It would not be fair to current CFI families to force us to lottery into a CFI model/International Baccalaureate middle school. Current CFI families should be prioritized for a new CFI/IB middle school if that is created.
  • It would split up siblings in different grades and make it more difficult for parents (but it’s not about us).
  • Many families would leave IPS for private schools, charter schools and other public districts. K-8 schools are one of IPS’s strong points. Families that decided to stay would likely leave IPS in 6th grade instead of 9th grade.
  • Moving to new location at a difficult time, developmentally. We sought out only K-8 schools for our daughter, that was a non-negotiable for us.
  • Many programs may only be working as well as they are because of their small scale. Sidener, for example, is already not full, so it has smaller class sizes and the whole specialty is in one building. Programs such as high ability and Spanish Immersion might not work as well if they are a smaller program within a larger school. IPS has been touting the advantages of K-8 buildings for many years, let’s not forget those advantages and the reasons that led the district to adopt K-8 buildings in the first place. A better choice might be to eliminate K-6 and 7-8 buildings. Combining these smaller schools could allow for more resources per school without a complete overhaul of the whole system. If a drastic change is decided upon, I think that everyone would benefit from a longer planning period, and not trying to jump right into the change in 2023. Also, there is not a benefit to realigning the grades just to match surrounding districts. That’s not a reason to do it.
  • You are potentially dividing families and making families navigating multiple schools. The IPS bus system is not reliable. How would a family navigate getting three-four kids to different school if a bus didn’t show? Additionally, the k-8 have smaller class sizes. You would be increasing grade size and potentially lowering a child’s academic success. Middle school is critical stage. Having kids blend during these years have proven to be difficult for so many districts.
  • We have 2 graduates of IPS 91 and 2 current students there and we strongly want our two current students to continue at 91 through 8th grade to be a part of the great middle school program there with the friends they have made there. If middle school is removed from 91 we will move our children to Washington Township.
  • I would imagine it would take a great deal of effort to make the switch and determine which schools become K-5 schools and which schools become 6-8 schools. I would like to see middle schools that have focused programs (i.e., CFI, dual-language, STEM, etc.) and that may be harder to do.
  • Families prefer K-8 to build relationships with staff and have their kids in the same school for longer. I’m concerned families will choose nearby non-IPS options that will remain K-8 and we will lose massive amounts of ADM funding over time.
  • K-8 often provides more one-on-one support, student/teacher familiarity, less fights & other issues very prevalent in township middle schools.
  • I am very unenthusiastic with this plan. I have volunteered at my son’s K-8 Montessori school (91), specifically with the middle schoolers. I appreciate the example they set for the younger children in their leadership and peace education. There are strong educational advantages to this model. Before IPS went to a K-6 and K-8 model, IPS middle schools have underperformed academically. In fact, I’ve already heard of middle school teachers at my son’s school who will LEAVE their positions if this change goes into effect. PLEASE give preexisting schools the option to stay K-6 or K-8. It will absolutely kill our teachers’, parents’, and student’s morale to have the rug yanked out from under them and have this change implemented in current schools. Our family will leave the district after 5th grade if this change is made. Our school’s community is so strong and the parents are the BEST! This type of change is not in our school community’s best interest, in my opinion. Feel free to contact me for more feedback.
  • Students may not have a consistent learning approach and experience if there is variability amongst the feeder elementary schools. Would need to look at what benefits and challenges result because of this.
  • Our daughter is happy at her current cfi school and would love to continue there till 8th grade. We have an incoming k student who would also love to be in the same school as her sister. Realigning would bring about transportation issues as there are not many school in our vicinity and transportation was extremely challenging last year. Please Do NOT realign the grades as it would cause hardships to students and sibling and friend separation. Thank you.
  • The major challenge that I see is dissecting small strong and healthy schools. The high preforming schools and the smaller k-8 schools. Breaking them apart will negatively affect their performance. That is not replication, but disintegration.
  • transportation and timelines with buses and parent drop offs
  • Change consumes a huge amount of resources and impacts all stakeholders; is there a sufficient payoff? Also, IPS could benefit from more consistency, IMO.
  • I like middle schoolers to stay with smaller set of students that they’ve grown up with vs mixing middle schoolers with kids from other schools. As a parent, I won’t know the new kids or their families. Middle school gets catty, kids grow up faster and that’s negative. 6th graders are too young to be mixed with 8th graders. Would rather only 7-8, leaving grade 6 in elementary if we separate. K-8 means fewer school changes, that stability helps kids mature in comfortable setting before separating in high school. If you have several children this could mean more schools at same time to manage. Different start times, different activities that could conflict. Not helpful as all children at same school, only k-8 or high school max different schools is 2, vs possibility of dealing with 3 schools.
  • Keeping children in a K-8 school has better outcomes socially and academically
  • Actually seeing it happen. Until then, I communicate with my child and have developed a relationship where she communicates with us.
  • It breaks up educational continuity for the children.
  • We would miss the small family feel of our school, and how the older kids look out for the younger kids. I honestly don’t know if we would stay in IPS if they make this shift; we would go to another school with the K-8 model.
  • This would be a waste of resources with no benefit.
  • I think it would hurt the students. There is a lot of older kids to younger kids mentorship that happens at our school, and I think it’s a benefit to both the older and younger kids. I think this is one of the reasons why these “high demand, higher-performing programs” work as well as they do, so by eliminating the K-8 model you’re eliminating a big piece of why these schools are working so well. I also have to say I think it will make IPS less attractive to many parents. Most dual-working households spend the first 6+ years of parenting constantly figuring out childcare. It’s such a relief to have all one’s kids at one school for awhile. The notion that we’ll have to figure out high school one day seems okay because it feels so far off. We also depend on older siblings to help younger siblings.
  • Splitting up siblings/ transportation. Changing parents school plans mid education
  • Lose the special learning of k-8
  • One thing that I like is the mentorship of the smaller grades by the middle school students, i.e. book buddies, etc.
  • Families with many kids in school benefit from having them all in one place. Consistency, comfort, community built through the years.
  • I will leave IPS is K-8 doesn’t continue
  • We spent 18 months looking for a house close to our current school that we could purchase for our family of five. We want to keep our children within walking distance to school for as long as possible. This is one of the reasons we love our CFI school so much. I like that my children can walk and ride their bikes to their classmates houses, and parents can easily help each other out with school drop offs or pick ups. It really does take a village to raise children, and I think our CFI school and neighborhood does an awesome job of taking care of everyone! I do not feel this would be the case if the older students were forced to go elsewhere. My children want to go to the same school together as long as possible, and so do my husband and I!
  • Students at high performance schools be may elect to leave IPS rather than participate in a grade realignment.
  • Being in a K-8 school right now, the K-8 population was a strong reason I CHOSE this school. I think it is massively important to have upper and lower grades housed together. The younger children can have strong role models in the older children. The older children practice responsibility and leadership. It is also helps families stay together and is one less thing for parents to worry about.
  • Being in a current CFI school, how would you guarantee that my children would be seamlessly migrated to a CFI middle school with the same caliber and academic programming as their K-5 school?
  • IPS does NOT have a solid history of running middle schools, how will you guarantee this does not become another failed educational endeavor?
  • Many families, including ours have planned for sibling preference for families…how will you guarantee placement for families in these preferred schools for incoming kindergartners if the next oldest sibling is entering grade 6?? This would have been a massive change from when the family started at the initial school
  • It seems to be working well with CFI schools keeping grades K-8 in the same building.
  • That they will not have well qualified and the appropriate numbers of staff to support this.
  • Maintaining the quality of the schools that get broken up. A strength of many of these K8 programs stems from creating an environment where students can mature and grow within a continuous and shared culture. Breaking successful programs into two would lose that dynamic. And there’s no guarantee that both “halves” or components would rebuild the successful culture of the original. It doesn’t make sense to me that IPS would intentionally break programs that have been successful. Replication seems like the way to build on the current successes – not realignment. Please don’t ruin the programs that have been working.
  • Very disruptive to existing schools and students. Limited benefit. Creates additional transition for all children
  • How will choice programs transition? So if your child is at a CFI currently will they be able to continue at a CFI middle school?
  • I like k-8 schools because it eliminates unnecessary transitions to different schools during the child’s school career. I like the interaction between the older and younger students, and the sense of leadership the older kids can gain as they grow older.
  • Changing working schools unnecessarily.
  • Two of the main reasons we chose to attend CFI was having our children at the school community they have been developed in from K-8. The other is the IB program and if IPS is not strategic in how middle schools will be developed/split our children will not be able to complete the IB curriculum.
  • Ips already did this once and moved away from it back to K 8. Parents might move students earlier if the schools are k6 and leave the district.
  • Lose the appeal of the neighborhood school and the consistency of K-8. Just because the suburbs do it, doesn’t make it a good idea. Let the kids go to school in the neighborhood that they live with the kids the live near. It makes “Indianapolis” feel like a small town.
  • Major disruption to schools like CFIs that thrive on K-8 model…disrupts the IB curriculum, family dynamics, the learning environment desired by families wanting the IB program and inquiry based learning. HUGE HUGE MISTAKE TO CHANGE THIS MODEL!!! CFI Schools have proven successful and should not be broken up but rather replicated and expanded.
  • Please don’t change the current model.
  • A lot of people like having their children at the same school through 8th grade, so people might not want to make this change.
  • Grouping schools in a way that still fits the IB model.
  • Covid, change, kids have been through enough the last few years
  • Another lottery/risk of not getting a spot in the middle school which follows the elementary school program, loss of close-knit school community during the vulnerable middle school years, loss of mentorship opportunities between older/younger grades, transportation issues for families with multiple children having to get to/from schools.
  • My child would have three schools during their time at IPS. I’m concerned with him having to be placed in a new cohort at sixth grade with the lottery system.
  • I think that keeping students in the same building k-8 builds stronger community and relationships for students which results in less stress, less behavioral issues, and improved learning outcomes. More support should be provided to 6-8 teachers while they remain in the current k-8 school buildings.
  • Lack of community experience for children attending K-8 if transition, larger classes with less community feel
  • Unnecessary stress on kids for changing schools
  • Physical space in some buildings
  • As a family with a CFI student we don’t see the potential realignment as beneficial. The students have a sense of community established. Having 6-8 graders around the younger kids gives them a sense of responsibility to act as leaders which is life lesson that can’t be learned in a 6-8 building.
  • The challenge I see is keeping the students on track and happy. I think a lot of families will leave IPS if this happens. I have seen so many benefits from a K-8. Those middle school years are hard and keeping the students in an elementary school while giving them a middle school experience has proven to keep the students happy and safe. They are then excited and ready for the bigger environment in high school. Transitioning from K-8 will be the demise of the CFI schools which is truly heartbreaking.
  • I think this is a horrible idea for current middle school students who are in their 7th grade year, that would spend their final middle school year having to be disrupted from teachers, friends, and their neighborhood school to move to a new middle school for one year. IPS is going to lose students and teachers in this model and especially in the CFI model.
  • Building space
  • Additional school transitions are psychologically hard on children…I believe this is why IPS switch to the K-8 model (Research based)
  • We chose our current school because it was K-8. We have loved the environment of having older and younger students interacting in clubs and activities. I don’t see how 6-8 grades coming from CFI would be able to continue their IB education if schools combine at middle school. I think there would be a large exodus of families to private schools if our current school changes to K-5.
  • Losing kids to other school districts in middle school
  • MANY challenges exist, but specifically I am concerned that the change would negatively impact the community at our school/neighborhood given that the majority of the older students would be unable to walk to school. I think also we should consider how K-8 schools that provide an IB curriculum fit into this model – I would want to make sure the middle schools these children attend still have IB curriculum, as well as prioritizing students’ abilities to maintain relationships with their peers formed early in their school careers, especially in the middle school years when these relationships are so important.
  • Loss of families who like their current schools and go elsewhere for middle school. Unless we have a butler lab or cfi equivalent option, we’d personally go private.
  • As mentioned above- I’m not sure this model is a good one.
  • Would the school model continue on for the middle school? Ie would the middle schools be Montessori/CFI/Lab teaching style or would it be just normal education?
  • Where would the middle schools be located? Would more busing be available?
  • I see where IPS needs a lot of help in areas but reconfiguring proven successful models doesn’t seem like a great idea
  • If you don’t put a middle school in my neighborhood, I’ll send my kids somewhere else
  • The challenges that could arise would have to do with the SIZE of the 6-8 buildings. I love that CFI 2 is a small school. The teachers know my student and that matters when we think about relationship building. One way to navigate that would be to cohort kids within the building if it needs to be large, so that the same teachers would follow them through middle school.
  • I chose CFI because of the K8 model for this reason. I like the idea that there are only 2 classrooms per grade and that the middle school team knows the students so well. “
  • The challenge would be integrating students in specific magnet and innovation programs that don’t have comparable/sister schools to move on to.
  • You lose the sense of community in the K-8 schools and the benefits to students having a smaller middle school program. In K-8 schools, there’s an opportunity for older students to work with younger ones. It fosters an opportunity for responsibility and role-modelling. I think more families would choose private schools over IPS middle schools, because making middle schools bigger would present more challenges socially for students and more behavior issues overall. Attainment would go down in the higher performing schools and then more families would leave IPS. IPS really needs to be careful as they move forward because they risk destroying the high performing and sought-after schools. Focus on hiring professionals and adjusting the support and work load so that teachers stay in the district. You can try to replicate programs and move things around, but if you can’t keep good teachers then none of it will matter.
  • Moving teachers and students
  • You are going to lose financial support from families. We will pull our children and funding from your school system if you take away the K-8 experience. I believe you’ve done this before and it didn’t work out well for you. Learn your own history. I’m all for expanding the choice schools but leave Montessori schools alone. The K-8 experience is vital to their success.
  • You would weaken the sense of school community that is developed by the students in a K-8 setting. The older kids love to help the younger ones in the same way they were helped when they were younger. Students feel secure in a familiar setting and would be more confident in learning, taking risks, and being themselves. Leaving K-8 teaches the older students how to be leaders, and allows for more collaboration and continuity with teachers in the school. Studies show reading and math proficiencies fall for students that attend a middle school vs. a K-8 school.
  • Building space needs do not equal educational needs. Solving building space/quality problems in the district should not be done at the expense of quality of kids’ educational outcomes.
  • Taking kids out of buildings that are successful to place them in an environment that IPS has historically struggled with
  • Keeping k-8 empowers the higher grades to act as mentors for the younger children and allows for stronger/longer relationships between children and teachers. Faculty and staff really get to know the children and guide their development into young adults in a community. Realigning grades forces children to reestablish these relationships
  • It divides families. It would force many north side families to move their 6th graders to private schools or out of district.
  • Right now, both of my children go to the same school and one of the main reasons we picked CFI 2 is because it goes through 8th grade.
  • Moving current students to other school buildings, changing peer group.
  • The success of so many of these programs was built, not only by the curriculum but also by the community that supports the school. It is much easier for parents and students to feel engaged at a school where they feel like more than just a number and the smaller k- 8 schools allow for a greater connection to teachers and admin for parents and students. So many of the extracurricular activities and clubs didn’t immediately appear at these schools but rather we’re brought into the schools as the community and opportunity around the school grew. The idea that pulling these schools apart in order to replicate them seems inconsistent with the sense of community they created. I recognize that IPS is hampered by too few resources to build more programming on this small scale, but to change what is working with the idea of expanding it seems inconsistent with what is working in my opinion. I am grateful for the school, staff and teachers where my children attend.
  • families with multiple students having to deal with multiple schools logistics. breaking up the strong sense of community that k-8 fosters.
  • Many! SPED and most vulnerable students lives would abruptly be interrupted. Families would face instability in planning as many make school choices based on logistics. Younger students would lose the opportunity to interact with and learn from older students. Older students would lose the social emotional lessons of being with younger students. This decision will further push families outside of the district.
  • You’re losing the school community and educational continuity that kids will have with K-8 schools. Also studies show that kids math and reading levels will drop. It seems quite likely that changing to middle school format would negatively effect our children education.
  • I have 2 students who will be at the same school for 4 years if it stays the same. Realignment will cause us to no longer be a part of IPS.
  • Potential for reassignment of schools. We made a choice to move homes for the purpose of locating near a specific school, and school reassignment to other locations would create undue and unforeseen challenges to families with multiple students and families that relied on attendance at a nearby school.
  • We are strong proponents of our children building community within their primary school from K-8. Students in IPS schools are already forced to switch communities twice (from daycare to primary and from primary to secondary). Adding a third change would further deteriorate the community aspect of the school network. It’s important to note that surrounding districts often do not lose this community aspect because their districts are much, much smaller than IPS.
  • Research shows evidence of benefits for students in k-8 educational settings. There is no evidence from peer reviewed research which shows a benefit in separating middle school grades. In fact, there is some evidence that rates of discipline increase in middle school grade only schools. This type of change would negatively impact students who benefit from specialized programming at current charter and magnet programs. I am firmly against this proposed change.
  • Siblings
  • Students lose academic progress when they transition schools, especially at the middle school level (grade 6-8), when much of their energy is being focused on social development. Keeping students in a K-8 facility without uprooting their existing social support network allows them to expand their confidence and focus on academics. Further, teachers and staff can incorporate these Grade 6-8 students in leadership/mentoring roles for younger students, which not only allows them to apply their own understanding of academic concepts in a meaningful way, but boosts a spirit of community and cooperation in the school. Students who are allowed to take a mentorship role within the school are shown to be more focused, dedicated, and higher performing than their peers at Grade 6-8 facilities.
  • These kiddos have already had two years of unprecedented upheaval due to Covid. To throw in another transition within an already transitional period seems like it’s only going to create more setbacks from a learning standpoint.
  • I think it would cause a significant drop in the “community feeling” we currently get with the school…which is very important to the success of the school.
  • A major problem would be damaging the existing successful choice programs, which are K-8 models. Replicating existing successes should not include damaging those programs by removing the K-8 structure.
  • Unfortunately, I think this would be a huge detriment to IPS. I grew up in Indianapolis in the same neighborhood I live in now. I went to the parochial school across the street, IHM, instead of 84. My parents would not have sent me to 84 then, in large part because it was a 1-5/6 school. My mother was a teacher, and she knew how important both (1) continuity and (2) small schools for children were. Now grown, I have also been a public school teacher, as has my husband, and we agree.
  • Back then, but especially in today’s landscape, when the mental health crisis for our elementary and middle school children is surging out of control, keeping students among peers, teachers, and parents that they know and who have known them and their siblings for six+ years can mean the difference between a student slipping through the cracks or not. It can mean the difference between (a) a teacher or parent asking the prior year teacher or another parent who has been in the school for six years “what’s up with Jeremy?” and (b) no one noticing a significant behavioral change that could have a lasting effect on Jeremy’s life and, worst case scenario, his classmates’ lives if the worst were to happen. Anxiety rates are so high in today’s kids. Shifting them to a large middle school in which they have to re-make friends and have much less oversight from teachers and less interaction with parents is a recipe for making those rates soar. Not to mention that most parents are from dual working households in IPS. A change to middle school would mean a change from two siblings getting picked up and dropped off to only one sibling getting picked up and the other on the bus. It’s the difference between both parents getting to show up at the same school event or having to divide their time between the younger kid’s elementary school event and the older’s middle school event. It’s the difference in parent involvement at the school, since their time will be divided and they too will have to make new a parent community. It’s the difference between after school play dates with neighborhood school friends and not having the time to make the 20-minute drive both ways on a weeknight after work.
  • We were thrilled to obtain a lottery spot at School 84, we want to support Indianapolis public schools, and we sincerely hope that our children will both attend School 84 for 9 years each. My husband and I are both former public school teachers who will actively engage in our children’s school community. However, we are also outliers as public school parents in our current social networks. Most of our friends have chosen or will choose parochial schools or private schools in the city. Many of my friends who are still considering private vs public schools have pointed to the tight community of private/parochial k-8 schools, and I’ve been able to happily say “but school 84 is k-8!” and that actually makes them pause and consider the IPS system more seriously. And I understand their concerns. If I am being completely honest, a change from k-8 to k-5/6- 8 is important enough to my husband and I that it would be the decision maker between continuing at school 84 for 9+ years and switching to parochial/private next year when our oldest son is in 1st grade. For these reasons, I truly believe that changing schools to a k-5/6-8 model will make IPS lose families who have the option to choose to pay for parochial/private schools instead. What’s more, because of the school choice tax voucher laws in Indiana, I do believe that would adversely impact the IPS budget overall, which I understand is already in great distress.
  • For all of these reasons, I emphatically encourage IPS to keep its schools k-8. I encourage IPS to keep what is good and working in the successful IPS schools instead of making those schools less attractive by trying solutions (like k-5/6-8) that IPS tried in the past (90’s/early 2000’s) when those same currently successful schools were not nearly as successful as they are today.
  • A few years ago I was told the district was moving TO K-8 programs. We have now built some successful K-8 program only to dismantle them a few years later. I am not convinced it is because K-8 schools have been shown to have low performing 6-8th graders. I see a lot of benefits to the K-8 structure
  • Issues with a second lottery system in 5th grade
  • K-8 schools provide a consistent home base for kids, give kids opportunities for leadership, limit transitions (increasing ease for parents and kids), and have demonstrated positive academic and developmental outcomes.
  • Behavior, inconsistent curriculum
  • Our current K-8 model works. It would be very disruptive to the students that are currently in 6-8.
  • Why on Earth would we do this right after our children and teachers have just barely gotten through covid??!! If this is a long term plan based on evidence, then think about this in years to come after our children have recovered emotionally from covid.
  • This seems so blind to the current state of our world. I also imagine you’ll lose a lot of families in the process. Our kids have been through enough. They need less stress not more.
  • And why does it matter if we align with other districts?
  • It depends on how you would implement it. If it means that students would need a second lottery, that has a huge and damaging impact on families. The lottery is hard and stressful enough particularly with families with more than one student. If you had to reapply for middle school,, you would disrupt preexisting school relationships with the school itself, teachers, and students, uproot families, and lost any sense of community.
  • hardship on working parents in terms of multiple drop off/pick up locations. less mentorship opportunities for older kids and mentee opportunities for the younger kids.
  • I like the model of keeping students in the same building for longer. It’s helpful for siblings and parents if they can stay in the same building for more years and have less transition.
  • Families with siblings will be separated sooner requiring transportation to different schools for at least three more years. Travel to middle school will likely be outside of schools close in proximity. Teachers will not know students as well if in much larger buildings – particularly concerning during those tricky middle school years.
  • Logistics. Confusion and issues with multi schools on one household.
  • K-8 schools are really wonderful – the presence of younger children along with older ones seems to keep the whole building unified, united, and calm. Older middle schoolers are happy to set examples and the little ones look up to the big kids. I would have more K-8 schools if possible.
  • For those of us with kids at various age levels & making certain we can attend the events we need to (i.e. parent in touch conferences, extracurriculars, etc.) I am a near eastside resident, with kids who attend school in Glendale, and work on the far southside – so attending everything & participation is often difficult to coordinate.
  • Loosing the community and consistency of the K-8 model
  • I think educating 11 to 14-year-olds is a bit of a challenge of some significance no matter what the structure. I worry that taking kids who have had one educational model for six years and then making them adjust to another model would create more challenges to an already challenging age. I also think that students benefit from being in community with kids who are older or younger and it would be a shame to lose that.
  • Chaos and Trauma for students that are benefitting from being a school where they are comfortable and supported. As a middle school parent, I have the option to send my child to Harshman middle. If the K-8 were low in enrollment in the middle school years and the middle schools were bursting at the seams this might make more sense. However, IB MYP starts in grade 6. Would this program be eliminated or moved into the middle school? As a parent of a recent Shortridge grad I would have an abundance of questions regarding the validity of this in a middle school.
  • As a former classroom teacher in a K-8, I witnessed the school culture being an incredible support for many middle schoolers. Those are hard years. Having teachers in the building with eyes on the middle school students fosters positive relationships and support structures for all students. Middle school students have leadership roles and often have a younger student that looks up to them and helps stabilize their unsteady sense of self.
  • If transitioning means applying again, kids could not be placed in an environment they are familiar with, or in a space that doesn’t know them.
  • There are SEVERAL as I see it. 1) Pulling resources away from K-5 programs that used to be K-8. 2) Decreasing/interrupting community built around K-8 neighborhood schools (the middle schools will likely see reduced parent-teacher engagement and reduced opportunities for schools who raise funds to meet gaps in IPS funding for important things like playground infrastructure, etc. 3) Isolating the middle school experience from elementary and separating siblings across more schools. It feels like the last 10 years IPS has pushed to close 6-8 middle schools and move towards a k-8 model. Why now are you trying to break those apart ?!? Constantly reshaping physical schools and curriculums is inefficient. It doesn’t seem like the reasons IPS is pushing or pursuing this are being presented clearly. MORE TRANSPARENCY, even if its just about addressing choice or economics is necessary.
  • Changing plans of families who have relied on the current model.
  • Logistics of families with kids at different schools
  • Lose a great deal of the community in K-8 schools – younger grades look up to, enjoy and learn from the older grades being in the same building.
  • If grades are realigned we will no longer have: A Culture of Community, A K-8 culture is built on relationships with an emphasis on community being central to its culture. A Continuity of Parent Involvement A key indicator of student success is parent involvement, which remains steady in K-8 schools through the middle school years when it tends to drop off as students move from 5th grade to a separate middle school environment. Leadership Opportunities; When the expectation for 8th graders is to be role models for the rest of the school, they rise to the occasion. Waiting until high school delays the chance for students to grow and think as a leader. Students in K-8 schools can put leadership skills into practice at school wide events where middle schoolers act as buddies to their younger peers, Time to Discover Strengths: The K-8 student graduate has acquired a composite of leadership and personal experiences that allows him or her to transition to high school, many with interviews and application processes, with confidence. Academic and Social Success: “Top Dogs” Test scores may improve as well. In a study done by Dr. Robert Offenberg of Philadelphia tat compared outcomes of students who attended K-8 schools versus the traditional 6-8 environment, the results support K-8. SAT scores in reading, math and science are significantly stronger in K-8 schools. We committed to 91 for all these reasons above, and we have stayed at 91 despite long commualswe have heard such great things about the school’s nurturing of 7& 8 graders. Please don’t hurt our children in order to save a dollar.
  • money
  • It goes against the overwhelming consensus of educational research, as well as the evidence from your own successful schools (CFI, Butler Lab, etc.) which are all K-8 schools, and much more successful than your 6-8 schools. Instead, realign grades to create MORE K-8 buildings.
  • This move would tear apart community at current K-8 (or 2-8, as my kids’ school does). The younger kids get mentoring and positive examples from middle school kids and the curricula are separate but bridged by common staffing, creating a cohesive experience. For my kids’ part, I also fear that any specialized or high-ability delivery would suffer as dedicated middle schools wouldn’t have the resources to meet needs of a range of student abilities. Consolidating abilities in larger middle schools would result in teachers being preoccupied with managing behavior and struggling to meet needs of underprepared students while high-ability students received poorer and less dedicated instruction. If IPS goes ahead with this plan, I know Sidener Academy will suffer because it’s a 2-8 school and seems ripe for some unfavorable approach that sacrifices its legacy of instruction and nurturing IPS’s brightest minds. This would be a grave error on IPS’s part.
  • You would remove s large portion of the models established in high performance schools like CFI. How in the world would the gifted students at Sidner still even have a school? It’s a short sided idea that will abandon the model that works for IPS high performance schools. There is zero functional need to align with nearby districts.
  • Change is always hard. However, our nearby districts have 6-8 buildings and IPS should have middle school options for all students. It doesn’t make sense to have some students attend a middle school and others attend a K-8.
  • The middle school model not proving to be beneficial. Splitting up younger kids with older kids prohibits them from learning from one another. Also splitting up siblings that could go to the same school for years together.
  • I see no challenge
  • Children’s SEL and sense of belonging
  • There’s a lot more than one. I would be upset if this happened because I am looking forward to being an 8th grader at my school. If I had to go to a middle school I would miss my class trip and walking to school with my friends and being able to try for the lead in the musical and 8th grade promotion with my small class and other fun events that we get to do. I don’t think this is a good idea because all of us are comfortable where we are and it would really ruin everything. If you want to change the school then you need to do it in phases – like only send 6th grade the first year and then add a grade each year so that current middle school kids aren’t affected. I love my school and would hate it if it changed. I only want to make a change when I go to high school and not before that.
  • It’s not fair to take the middle school kids out of their building when they aren’t expecting that. It would be really hard to adjust to a new place right before I had to do that for high school too. It would also mean that sports would probably have try-outs and some people wouldn’t make the team which is why a lot of my friends like IPS sports because we can all play even if they aren’t really good. Where would you put the building? I don’t want to ride a bus. I like that my school is where I can walk or ride my bike. I don’t think a lot of teachers will want to move into the new building either. I think they are happy where they are and would just leave which would be terrible because we have great teachers. This change would need to be done slowly to make it work because I think you will have a lot of angry people if you try to do it like next year. I don’t think it’s a good idea at all though. I don’t see why we need to change what we have. Our k-8 school is awesome.
  • It would be a really big school with a lot of kids. I like my small school.
  • Kids have to transition to an extra school instead of staying at one they know through their younger years.
  • Picking up siblings if in different buildings
  • This creates real heartburn for me. What is the problem we are trying to correct? We have been sending our daughter out of district because we could not get into the school 0.55 miles from our house until this upcoming school year. A benefit of changing schools now that she is in (and with her brother still out of district) is that we don’t have to worry about where she is going for grades 6-8. Now this might go away? Will we have to re-enter a lottery to get into the middle school closest to our house because that is the only answer IPS can come up with to provide opportunity to all? When talking to our daughter about switching schools she noted that her classmates at her old school lived near each other and could play in the evenings and weekends and she would finally know what that feels like. Please stop the nonsense and come up with solutions to better other schools rather than forcing kids to schools not in their neighborhoods.
  • None. This would be best for everyone!
  • Staffing. Period. If we realign the grades we have to find someone to fill in all of the gaps and that can be hard.
  • Six Graders need to be isolated from 7th and 8 th graders. There should be a 6th grade hallway where the 6th graders change classes.
  • Staff and family resistance to change
  • Lack of continuity between elementary and middle school curricula, losing families to private schools, potential loss of IB status for middle school
  • sixth graders are not ready for middle school.
  • Specific programs work when a school is k-8. The older students help out the younger ones. I think losing the k-8 model would be a mistake, I would bet the current schools using this model have higher performing middle school test scores. Why change something that has worked just to be like other districts?
  • Staff reconfiguration. I currently teach 5th and 6th grade. I may be displaced if reconfigured. This is at a time, when it is hard for IPS to get highly qualified leachers like myself.
  • I think one major challenge which can not be understated is community attachment to schools. Closing schools, realigning schools, moving students, is always a hot button issue which brings up a lot of emotions. We need to ensure we consider the needs and wishes of our community and involve them in the process of making these decisions, which I feel we are on track with this already. As an educator in IPS as well as a resident of the district, I appreciate that my feedback is solicited as we move forward as TeamIPS.
  • Older siblings won’t be on hand for younger siblings.
  • Many neighborhood schools have large families that all attend the same school, and this will split them up, which can be challenging for parents.
  • may mean shutting smaller schools
  • Behavior. You will also lose sidener academy, which does nothing but great things for IPS. You must test into that school. Where would IPS’s test scores be without the full high ability school? Also, many teachers can’t move south or west. Leave sidener alone, but add to programs, such as the CFI schools. Have not heard good things about the butler lab middle grades.
  • For families? After school care.
  • Staffing, IPS already has a staffing retention difficulty.
  • Many of the programs you claim are successful and that you want to replicate, are in fact K-8 buildings, and the idea of k-8 is a foundational part of those programs. If you want to replicate those programs, simultaneously changing the grade alignment at those buildings will be a very steep challenge for staff. Replicating programs is already very difficult to do successfully, and adding a foundational change to how those schools models work may result in higher staff turnover due to stress and lack of resources to do so successfully.
  • The K-8 models allow the older children to support the younger children with programs like Book Buddies, where older students read with younger ones. The K-8 model seems to make the social challenges of middle school less intense.
  • Too many middle schoolers in one place is tough to handle. I’m a middle school teacher at Butler Lab 55 and strongly believe in the K-8 model. It builds school spirit, little kids look up to big kids, it helps adults to see middle schoolers as kids still. I would more than likely find a job outside of IPS or outside of middle school if this change were to be made.
  • There aren’t established middle schools for some of the choice schools. Also, as students develop in the community of their K-8, they can be great models for the younger students. They also have respect for their school because they value the program they are apart of. Will more teachers need to be hired for middle schools to have all the specials teachers and grade level teachers they have in K-8? Will there be a new middle school lottery? Will students need to travel further to attend a new middle school?
  • They have failed in the past. Parents want options, but they also want k-8 buildings. Some of our most successful middle school performances are in these k-8 buildings where support and instruction are more defined and meet the needs of individuals. I am STRONGLY opposed to taking away middle school from our K-8 programs.
  • Would have to go through lottery again for middle school; kids would likely be split from friends at a time when peers are becoming more important to development; kids would have to change curriculum styles unnecessarily, as opposed to maintaining consistent learning for a longer period
  • Moving children who are already in K-8 schools will disrupt progress in existing schools and potentially split up siblings.
  • I think the K-8 Model is great. It allows little kids to learn from big ones and vice versa. It teaches empathy and gives mentoring opportunities. It would be a shame to get rid of it.
  • The students who are already in MS in a K-8 building
  • This greatly impacts community feel at each school, challenges for families with children at multiple schools, time for transition, concerns of many families leaving the district with this change.
  • ensuring students with the same learning platform and performance level are consolidated in the middle school setting; not creating a long commute
  • Buildings space and school changes.
  • A middle school needs to be opened on the southside.
  • Losing continuity of community in support of students as they transition into the social and academic challenges of middle school
  • One more transportation need for families with more than one student.
  • Many students will have to move schools
  • The data shows that K-8 schools have a higher retention rate. the fact that 91 is a K-8 school is the main reason we stayed there when we moved out of district. Keeping kids with their friends during that developmental phase supports better mental health. I am a developmental specialist and would strongly encourage the district to look at the data on mental health outcomes in a K-8 setting versus a 6-8 setting.