Posts: 4,927
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
127
I would guess that the 28 number could change in the future.
The bigger issue is the need to redraw the boundary map. That alone could really help things.
Posts: 2,408
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
50
Can you elaborate on that? I'm curious to know details.
Posts: 4,927
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
127
On the boundary map?
The WRDSB (secondary at least) map of who goes to what school hasn't been redrawn in years. So as new neighbourhoods pop up and explode some schools get filled faster than others. By shifting the boundaries of who goes to what school you can alter the population of those schools. That being said, there are politics with that. Parents move into a neighbourhood expecting a certain school, and then maybe that changes.
Cambridge is a prime example, five schools, all no where close to capacity. The map doesn't even make sense. GCI draws from areas directly around it, but also over in Clemens Mills too when it's closer to other schools.
Posts: 2,408
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
50
I didn't know that the high school boundary map hasn't shifted. That should be updated for sure before the huge expense of a new school is considered.
Posts: 4,927
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
127
I do still think a new school is needed, but so too is redrawing the map
Posts: 4,927
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
127
It needs to be done board wide
Posts: 76
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
3
School boards are often hesitant to start boundary reviews, much less make major changes through them, because of the outcry from parents of affected children.
Posts: 4,927
Threads: 155
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
127
Oh the outcry is massive. Thats the whole reason they're as wonky as they are