Back in the late 1990s, LAUSD was severely overcrowded, and it embarked on one of the largest public works projects ever undertaken. The $27 Billion project added schools all over the city and added 170,000 seats to relieve overcrowding and take schools off of multitrack calendars. At about the same time as these schools began opening, LAUSD also began approving charter schools in droves, and has since approved 130,000 students to move into charter schools.
So what happens when you build a ton of new schools but also lose enrollment to charter schools? Declining Enrollment. The issue of declining enrollment has been a hot topic in the past few months, especially with the charter school expansion plan that has been proposed. But what does this look like on the ground?
Here is a small case study of middle schools the Vermont/Wilshire area. 20 years ago, there were two main middle schools serving this area – Berendo and Virgil. They were severely overcrowded – in 1999 both middle schools had over 3,000 students. They both operated on multitrack calendars. So LAUSD decided to build build build. They added three new middle school campuses in the area – John Liechty, Young Oak Kim and the Ambassador School (links show that these schools were built to ease overcrowding).
Source: California Department of Education
You can see that the New LAUSD Schools had an immediate effect of reducing the enrollment of the two larger schools. But beginning in 2009, the expansion of charter schools in the area (Camino Nuevo #2, Vista Charter Middle, Rise Ko Hyang, LA Academy of Arts and Enterprise) begin also taking some of the enrollment from the area.
I think the interesting thing about the numbers, however, is that the new LAUSD school’s enrollment has remained relatively unchanged in the face of charter expansion. It is the older schools – Berendo and Virgil (as well as Liechty)- that have taken the biggest hit in enrollment. These schools are now under-enrolled instead of overcrowded.
Why would the newer schools be safe from enrollment dips while the old schools are eaten alive? My theory: because those schools are new. The campuses are beautiful, the names are flashy (“The Ambassador School of Global Leadership”) and they do not carry the reputation the other schools have developed over time.
Reputation is king. If a school has a long negative reputation, it can be hard to shake, even if the school has turned around. So, how have those schools performed now that they are smaller? Next time….
*Note: Many school zones overlap, so it can be hard to calculate exact changes in student populations or map who goes where. This is just my best effort on a Wednesday Night.