Analysis of 2015 Round 1 School Choice - BoardDocs

Analysis of 2015 Round 1 School Choice

May 2015

Denver Public Schools

Purpose & Table of Contents

2

Purpose

To provide a summary analysis of the result from the first round of School Choice. This includes

looking at participation rates, the number of seats offered, and the results in terms of students

matching with their preferred choices.

This document is intended to give audiences an overview of the process and helps guide district

leadership on programmatic or enrollment system decisions intended to improve family outcomes.

Table of Contents

Slide 3: Executive Summary

Slides 4-7: Participation in Choice

Slides 8-10: Seats Offered in Choice

Slide 11-12: Assignment Results

Slides 13-15: Schools with the Highest Demand

Slides 16-34: Appendix

Executive Summary

3

Executive Summary

Participation Seat Offers Results School Demand Appendix

Participation

Participation in SchoolChoice increased by 10% (2,259) compared to 2014.

Applicants in non-transition grade made up a greater proportion of the number of applicants this year

compared to last year.

Seat Offers

There are enough seats to serve all students, however the quality of the seats available falls short in

comparison to the preferences of families.

This often results in families being assigned to lower-performing programs

Round 1

Results

As a result of higher participation rates combined with relatively flat number of high-performing seats,

the percentage of families receiving one of their top choices has decreased.

In most regions of the city for middle school, there are disproportionately popular programs. This

results in some programs with long waitlists, while other programs remain unfilled.

Next Steps

Incorporate the findings from this report into the 2015 Spring Strategic Regional Analysis (SRA).

Identify regions with lower rates of families being matched with their top choices to determine potential

actions (programmatic or enrollment system) to increase assignment and satisfaction rates.

22,419 23,066 22,729

24,988

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Total Number of Round 1 Participants

4

How many students participated in SchoolChoice this year?

Overall the number of applicants increased by 10% (2,259) compared to last year.

Transition grade students made up a smaller proportion of the number of participants this year, 59% compared to 62%.

There was a spike in the number of applicants in non-transition grade levels immediately following a transition grade

level

1st Grade: 66% of the applicants in 15-16 participated in 14-15

7th Grade: 49% of the applicants in 15-16 participated in 14-15

10th Grade: 49% of the applicants in 15-16 participated in 14-15

Key Observations

Grade Participants % of Total

EC 4,443 18%

Kinder 5,392 22%

1st 1,144 5%

2nd 695 3%

3rd 677 3%

4th 579 2%

5th 569 2%

6th 5,365 21%

7th 684 3%

8th 574 2%

9th 3,957 16%

10th 484 2%

11th 292 1%

12th 133 1%

Total 24,988 100%

Executive Summary


What were the participation rates across transition grades versus previous years?

5

86%84%

83%84% 84%

88%

76% 76%

78%

68%

70%

72%

74%

76%

78%

80%

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015

Kinder 6th 9th

2015-16 SchoolChoice Participation Rates

Executive Summary


Participation rates are calculated by taking the total number of applicants who submitted a choice form divided by the

total number of participants plus the number of students within our line of sight who did not participate.

Participation rates are only calculated for transition grade levels.

Identifying kindergarten non-participants is challenging because DPS only has line of sight to students who are

currently enrolled in an ECE program in DPS to serve as the denominator for this calculation. Contrastingly, 6th and 9th

grade rates are easier due to students being in DPS already for 5th and 8th grade.

2015 Round 1 Participation:

How does the number of applicants compare to last year?

6

GradeParticipants

2014-15

Participants

2015-16Year Over Year Change % Change

EC 4,445 4,443 -2 0%

Kinder 5,560 5,392 -168 -3%

1st 824 1,144 320 39%

2nd 489 695 206 42%

3rd 471 677 206 44%

4th 434 579 145 33%

5th 435 569 134 31%

6th 4,870 5,365 495 10%

7th 537 684 147 27%

8th 427 574 147 34%

9th 3,620 3,957 337 9%

10th 342 484 142 42%

11th 188 292 104 55%

12th 87 133 46 53%

Total 22,729 24,988 2,259 10%

The Number of 2015-16 Participants Compared to 2014-15

There was a 18% (1,595) increase in the number of non-transition grade level students submitting choice forms this year

compared to last year.

Further analysis will be performed to investigate whether these students are trying to “trade up” from programs where

families may be dissatisfied.

Key Observations

Executive Summary


Where are the areas of lower participation in SchoolChoice?

7

Non-Participants 2014-15 Non-Participants 2015-16

Executive Summary


The implementation of the West MS and Southwest MS zones increased participation from 67% to roughly 90%.

This follows a similar historic trend with other zones, that regardless of socioeconomic level and the primary language,

participation can be very high given proper outreach.

Key Driver

Are there enough seats for all of the applicants?

A ratio of greater than 1.0 means that there are more seats available than there are students. Note that in all grades DPS

has adequate capacity to meet enrollment needs.

The increase in the number of participants was met by an increase in the number of seat offers.

8

GradeSeat Offers

2015-2016

2015-2016

Denver ApplicantsSeat:Applicant Ratio

EC 4,795 4,292 1.1

Kinder 7,597 5,195 1.5

1 1,791 1,068 1.7

2 1,375 635 2.2

3 1,312 620 2.1

4 1,129 522 2.2

5 1,168 532 2.2

6 6,329 5,098 1.2

7 860 602 1.4

8 749 499 1.5

9 6,144 3,652 1.7

10 1,262 425 3.0

11 916 260 3.5

12 880 112 7.9

K-12 Total 31,512 19,220 1.6

EC-12 Total 36,307 23,512 1.5

Seat Offers Compared to Denver Applicants

Key Observations

Executive Summary


Are there enough seats for all of the applicants in each region?

In aggregate there are enough seats to meet district needs but when location is considered constraints are identified.

9th grade seats in FNE are limited but this statistic is clouded by several schools where eighth graders are automatically

assigned to 9th grade which reduces the number of seats offered.

ECE seats tend to be more dispersed along the west side of the city.9

ECE: 1.5

Kinder: 1.6

6th: 1.1

9tth: 1.4

ECE: 1.0

Kinder: 1.5

6th: 1.3

9th: 1.8

ECE: 1.0 Kinder 1.6

6th : 1.0 9th: 0.8

ECE: 1.0

Kinder: 1.1

6th: 1.5

9th: 2.4

ECE: 1.3

Kinder: 1.5

6th: 1.2

9th: 2.7

NorthwestNear Northeast

Far Northeast

SoutheastSouthwest

Executive Summary


Key Observations

Are there enough high quality seats for all of the applicants?

10

9% 9%

5% 8%3%9%

16%

21%

38%

39%

29%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% 1st Choice % of Seat Offers

Executive Summary


Families are seemingly understanding and

acting upon school quality. Nearly every

green and blue seat is full, while less than

half of SPF orange seats were filled.

67% of participants selected a school with

a blue or green SPF rating as their first

choice while only 54% of the seats

available met that criteria.

Roughly 1 in 10 families are taking a

chance and selecting schools that do not

have an SPF rating, with the hope that

when these schools are rated, they will be

high performing.

SPF 131415-16

Seat Offers

# Filled

Seats

%

Filled

Distinguished 2,957 2,846 96%

Meets Expectations 7,731 7,398 96%

Accredited On Watch 4,146 3,493 84%

Accredited On Priority Watch 1,757 770 44%

Accredited On Probation 1,705 1,209 71%

No Rating (New School) 1,774 1,517 86%

Grand Total 20,070 17,305 86%

Are families choosing higher performing schools?

The proportion of applicants selecting a blue/green/unrated school increased to 76% in 2015 versus 73% in 2014.

Very few families list a low performing school #1, though more families are assigned to those schools because of lack of

capacity in higher-performing schools.

11

12%

29%

29%

46%

41%

38%

15%

3%

9%

22%

18%

16%

3%

4%

3%

2%

5%

5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

1st Choice by SPF Rating

Distinguished Meets No Rating Accredited on Watch Accredited on Priority Watch Accredited on Probation

Key Observations

*Only transition grade applicants (kinder, 6th, 9th) are included

Executive Summary


80%90% 93% 94% 95%

80%90% 93% 94% 95%

78%89% 93% 94% 95%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1st Choice 1st or 2nd Choice 1st-3rd Choice 1st-4th Choice 1st-5th Choice

Three Year Comparison of Round 1 Results

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

What % of applicants received one of their preferred schools in transition grades?

Results by region are included in the appendix.

Round 1 results have remained relatively consistent year over year. There was a slight drop in the percent of applicants

who received their first choice this year due to an increase in participation that was not met by an increase in the quality

of the seats available. There remain disproportionately popular programs in every region at the MS level.

12

* Transition grade levels only kinder, 6th and 9th

Grade1st

Choice

1st or 2nd

Choice

1st -3rd

Choice

1st -4th

Choice

1st -5th

Choice

Kinder 83% 91% 94% 95% 96%

6th 74% 86% 91% 93% 94%

9th 77% 90% 94% 95% 95%

Total 78% 89% 93% 94% 95%

Executive Summary


2015-16 Round 1 Results by Preference Selection

Key Observations

Highest Demand Schools: Kindergarten

13

School NameSPF

Rating

Number of students who

listed each school as their

1st preference

2015

Rank

2014

Rank

2013

Rank

Swigert International School* 149 1 2 1

Escalante-Biggs Academy** 127 2 1 3

William (Bill) Roberts K-8 School* 104 3 10 6

Stephen Knight Center** 100 4 6 7

Highline Academy Northeast 98 5 80 N/A

Slavens K-8 School 93 6 9 8

Isabella Bird Community School* 93 6 21 103

Bradley International School 88 8 14 39

Edison Elementary School 86 9 16 25

Brown International Academy 84 10 7 28

Top 10 Requested Programs for 2015-2016:

School NameSPF

Rating

Total Number of

Seats Offered

Number of seats

available to non-

boundary/zone

applicants

Number of

students

waitlisted

Denver Green School 31 0 34

Southmoor Elementary School 38 0 43

Steck Elementary School 40 0 77

Slavens K-8 School 66 0 80

Carson Elementary School 49 1 88

Asbury Elementary School 41 1 33

Swigert International School 81 5 94

Place Bridge Academy 52 1 17

Bromwell Elementary School 30 4 58

Force Elementary School 60 1 15

Kinder programs that were the hardest for non-boundary applicants to get into:

Executive Summary


* Located in an enrollment zone, supported by a larger boundary

** Preschool center

Highest Demand Schools: 6th Grade

14

School NameSPF

Rating



1st preference

2015

Rank

2014

Rank

2013

Rank

McAuliffe International School 452 1 1 2

DSST: Green Valley Ranch MS 281 2 2 1

STRIVE Prep - Westwood 260 3 5 5

DSST: Stapleton MS 258 4 3 6

Denver School of Arts MS 232 5 4 3

DSST: College View MS 231 6 7 21

DSST: Byers MS 204 7 11 17

Hamilton Middle School 196 8 6 4

Skinner Middle School 192 9 8 12

DSST: Cole MS 170 10 13 9


School NameSPF

Rating

Total Number of

Seats Offered

Number of seats

available to non-

boundary/zone

applicants

Number of

students

waitlisted

KIPP Sunshine Peak Academy 25 1 144

McAuliffe International School 292 4 235

DSST: Green Valley Ranch MS 147 9 194

KIPP Montbello College Prep 52 2 34

William (Bill) Roberts K-8 67 3 44

Marie L. Greenwood Academy 46 4 58

STRIVE Prep - Westwood 135 18 223

Omar D Blair Charter School 32 4 39

STRIVE Prep - GVR 130 8 79

DSST: Stapleton MS 157 43 229

6th grade programs that were the hardest for non-boundary applicants to get into:

Executive Summary


Highest Demand Schools: 9th Grade

15

School NameSPF

Rating



1st preference

2015

Rank

2014

Rank

2013

Rank

East High School 681 1 1 1

Northfield High School 502 2 N/A N/A

South High School 355 3 2 2

Thomas Jefferson High School 198 4 5 4

STRIVE Prep - SMART Academy 183 5 4 10

DSST: Green Valley Ranch HS 173 6 7 3

CEC Middle College of Denver 157 7 5 5

MLK HS 143 8 9 9

Abraham Lincoln High School 139 9 8 7

George Washington High School 138 10 3 8


School NameSPF

Rating

Total Number of

Seats Offered

Number of seats

available to non-

boundary/zone

applicants

Number of

students

waitlisted

KIPP Montbello Collegiate HS 140 5 23

Northfield High School 227 114 351

MLK HS 200 8 19

East High School 624 304 231

CEC Middle College of Denver 125 125 52

STRIVE Prep - SMART Academy 160 160 24

South High School 463 313 42

KIPP Denver Collegiate HS 130 130 7

North High School 370 54 0

George Washington High School 423 226 13

9th grade programs that were the hardest for non-boundary applicants to get into:

Executive Summary


-Appendix-

16

Appendix:

2015 Round 1 Seat Offers:

How many seats were offered this year compared to last year?

There was a substantial increase in the number of seats that were offered this year compared to last year.

Approximately 2,000 seats across over 20 different schools were opened up this year as a result of year zero schools and

grade configurations changes.

17

GradeSeat Offers

2014-2015

Seat Offers

2015-2016Comparison

EC 4,370 4,795 425

Kinder 7,026 7,597 571

1 1,029 1,791 762

2 839 1,375 536

3 921 1,312 391

4 661 1,129 468

5 906 1,168 262

6 5,716 6,329 613

7 870 860 -10

8 698 749 51

9 5,515 6,144 629

10 1,148 1,262 114

11 1,051 916 -135

12 834 880 46

K-12 Total 27,214 31,512 4,298

EC-12 Total 31,584 36,307 4,723

Round 1 2015-16 Compared to 2014-15Round 1 2014-15 Compared to 2013-14

Key Observations

GradeSeat Offers

2013-2014

Seat Offers

2014-2015Comparison

EC 4,076 4,370 294

Kinder 6,786 7,026 240

1 1,175 1,029 -146

2 932 839 -93

3 670 921 251

4 756 661 -95

5 837 906 69

6 5,980 5,716 -264

7 857 870 13

8 633 698 65

9 5,674 5,515 -159

10 900 1,148 248

11 817 1,051 234

12 619 834 215

K-12 Total 26,636 27,214 578

EC-12 Total 30,712 31,584 872

Executive Summary


Appendix:

2015 Round 1 Participation:

How does the number of applicants compare year over year?

The number of 6th grade applications has

increased by 24% since year 1 while kinder

applications have decreased by 7%

18

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Kinder 5,810 5,859 5,560 5,392

6th 4,339 4,703 4,870 5,365

9th 3,790 3,745 3,620 3,957

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

ROUND 1 PARTICIPANTS- TRANSITION GRADE LEVELS

GradeParticipants

2014-15

Participants

2015-16Change

%

Change

Kinder 5,560 5,392 -168 -3%

6th 4,870 5,365 495 10%

9th 3,620 3,957 337 9%

Total 14,050 14,714 664 5%

*Totals for all grade levels can be located in the appendix

Executive Summary


Appendix:

2015 Round 1 Results:

What percent of applicants received one of their preferred schools?

78%

89% 93% 94% 95%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Assignment by Preference for Denver Participants

19


Grade Level Preference Selections

1st 1st or 2nd 1st-3rd 1st-4th 1st-5th

Kinder 83% 91% 94% 95% 96%

6th 74% 86% 91% 93% 94%

9th 77% 90% 94% 95% 95%

Total 78% 89% 93% 94% 95%

Executive Summary


Appendix:


What percent of applicants received one of their preferred schools in FNE?

73%

88%93% 95% 96%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%


Assignment by Preference for Far Northeast Participants

20




Kinder 91% 97% 98% 98% 99%

6th 68% 84% 90% 92% 92%

9th 60% 83% 93% 96% 96%

Total 73% 88% 93% 95% 96%

Executive Summary


Appendix:


What percent of applicants received one of their preferred schools in NNE?

77%

89% 92% 94% 94%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Assignment by Preference for Near Northeast Participants

21




Kinder 80% 90% 93% 95% 95%

6th 72% 87% 92% 93% 94%

9th 78% 90% 92% 93% 93%

Total 77% 89% 92% 94% 94%

Executive Summary


Appendix:


What percent of applicants received one of their preferred schools in NW?

86%

93%94%

95%96%

80%

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%


Assignment by Preference for Northwest Participants

22




Kinder 84% 91% 94% 94% 95%

6th 86% 93% 94% 96% 96%

9th 87% 94% 95% 96% 96%

Total 86% 93% 94% 95% 96%

Executive Summary


Appendix:


What percent of applicants received one of their preferred schools in SE?

78%

88% 91% 93% 94%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Assignment by Preference for Southeast Participants

23




Kinder 79% 88% 92% 94% 94%

6th 74% 86% 90% 92% 93%

9th 84% 92% 93% 93% 93%

Total 78% 88% 91% 93% 94%

Executive Summary


Appendix:


What percent of applicants received one of their preferred schools in SW?

81%

90%

93%95% 95%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%


Assignment by Preference for Southwest Participants

24




Kinder 85% 91% 94% 95% 96%

6th 73% 85% 90% 93% 94%

9th 92% 98% 98% 98% 98%

Total 81% 90% 93% 95% 95%

Executive Summary



How many applicants did not receive one of their preferred schools?

25

Grade2014

Unassigned% of Total

2015

Unassigned% of Total Difference

EC 117 3% 114 3% 0%

Kinder 69 1% 33 1% 0%

1st-5th 43 2% 50 1% -1%

6th 14 <1% 23 <1% 0%

7th-8th 14 2% 5 <1% -1%

9th 3 <1% 1 <1% 0%

10th-12th 4 1% 2 <1% 0%

K-12 Total 147 1% 114 1% 0%

EC-12 Total 264 1% 228 1% 0%

Less than 1% (57) of Denver participants in transition grades listed five schools on their choice form and did not

receive one of their preferred schools.

SPF Rating % Defaulted # Defaulted

Distinguished 4% 2

Meets Expectations 16% 9

Accredited On Watch 5% 3

Accredited On Priority Watch 4% 2

Accredited on Probation 0% 0

No Rating 2% 1

Enrollment Zone 70% 40

Total 100% 57

Executive Summary


Appendix:


Are there enough high quality seats for all of the applicants in the Far Northeast?

While 50% of the applicants listed a blue or green school as their first choice, only 35% of the seats

offered in Round 1 were at high quality schools.

Overall, there are enough seats in aggregate to serve each of the applicants, but there are not

enough high quality seats to fulfill every preference.

There is a disproportionate demand for certain programs (e.g., DSST: GVR and Greenwood) over

other options.

26

Key Observations

SPF RatingSeats

Offered

Filled

Seats

% of

Seats

Filled

Distinguished 354 347 98%

Meets Expectations 799 657 82%

Accredited On Watch 1124 920 82%

Accredited On Priority Watch 273 65 24%

Accredited On Probation 394 209 53%

No Rating 398 307 77%

Grand Total 3,342 2,505 75% 11% 12%

7%12%2%

8%31%

33%

25%

24%

25%11%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Executive Summary


Appendix:


Are there enough high quality seats for all of the applicants in the Near Northeast?

While 74% of applicants listed a blue or green school as their first choice, only 61% of the seats

offered in Round 1 are at high quality schools.



There is a disproportionate demand for certain programs (e.g., Northfield, DSST: Stapleton, McAuliffe

and Swigert) over other options, resulting in long waitlists for these programs.

27

Key Observations

SPF RatingSeats

Offered

Filled

Seats

% of

Seats

Filled

Distinguished 1,750 1,750 100%





No Rating 748 672 90%

Grand Total 6,559 5,504 84%15% 11%

1% 6%2% 6%8%

15%

28%

34%

46%

27%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Executive Summary


Appendix:


Are there enough high quality seats for all of the applicants in the Northwest?

While 57% of applicants listed a green school as their first choice, only 43% of the seats offered in

Round 1 are at high quality schools. There are no blue seats offered in the Northwest region.

Overall, there are enough seats in aggregate to serve each of the applicants, but only a limited

number of high quality seats offered.

There is a disproportionate demand for certain programs (e.g., Skinner MS) over other options.

28

Key Observations

SPF RatingSeats

Offered

Filled

Seats

% of

Seats

Filled






No Rating 84 63 75%

Grand Total 3,091 2,581 84% 2% 3%

16% 20%2%

4%23%

31%

57%

43%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Executive Summary


Appendix:


Are there enough high quality seats for all of the applicants in the Southeast?

97% of applicants listed a blue or green school as their first choice.

All of the seats offered in the Southeast are high quality options or are not yet rated.

There is only a 2% gap between the quality of the seats requested and the percent available.

Overall, there are enough seats in aggregate to serve each of the applicants, and the Southeast is

saturated with high quality options.

29

Key Observations

SPF RatingSeats

Offered

Filled

Seats

% of

Seats

Filled






No Rating 153 81 53%

Grand Total 2,874 2,616 91%3% 5%0% 0%0% 0%0% 0%

63%

75%

34%20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Executive Summary


Appendix:


Are there enough high quality seats for all of the applicants in the Southwest?

While 53% of applicants listed a blue or green school as their first choice, only 36% of the seats

offered in Round 1 are at high quality schools.



There is a disproportionate demand for certain programs (e.g., DSST: College View, STRIVE Prep -

Westwood and KIPP Sunshine Peak) over other options.

30

Key Observations

SPF RatingSeats

Offered

Filled

Seats

% of

Seats

Filled



Accredited On Watch 1,140 863 76%



No Rating 408 294 72%

Grand Total 4,465 3,465 78% 8% 9%5% 7%

12%22%

23%

26%

33%

29%

20%7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Executive Summary


Appendix: Where did Trevista MS students selected and assign to?

31

Executive Summary


School Name# 1st Preference

Requests

1. Skinner 39

2. STRIVE Prep Sunnyside 15

3. West Leadership Academy 10

4. Bryant Webster 14

5. DCIS 3

6. Denver School of the Arts 3

7. KIPP Sunshine Peak 3

8. West Generation 2

9. DSST Cole 1

10. Cesar Chavez 1

*Totals only included for 6th and 7th graders

School Name#

Assigned

1. Skinner 43

2. STRIVE Prep Sunnyside 21

3. West Leadership Academy 11

4. Bryant Webster 5

5. West Generation 3

6. STRIVE Prep Lake 1

7. STRIVE Prep GVR 1

8. Morey 1

9. Denver Montessori 1

10. DCIS 1

Top 10 Assigned SchoolsTop 10 First Choice Schools

100% of Trevista zone students were placed at their first choice school if they selected either Skinner or Strive

Appendix: Sims Transition 7th and 8th Grade

32

Executive Summary



Requests

1. DSST GVR MS 25

2. KIPP Montbello College Prep 8

3. DCIS at Montbello MS 6

4. MLK Jr MS 3

5. Florida Pitt Waller MS 3


7. STRIVE Prep Montbello 2

8. Farrell B. Howell MS 2

9. Hamilton MS 1

10. Noel Community Arts MS 1

*Totals only included for 6th and 7th graders

School Name#

Assigned


2. DCIS at Montbello MS 7

3. DSST GVR 5

4. MLK Jr MS 4

5. DSST GVR 4

6. KIPP Montbello College Prep 4

7. Florida Pitt Waller MS 3

8. Farrell B. Howell MS 3

9. Omar D. Blair 2

10. STRIVE Prep Montbello 2


Appendix: Sims Transition 10th ,11th and 12th Grade

33

Executive Summary



Requests

1. DSST GVR HS 14

2. Collegiate Prep Academy 9

3. MLK Jr HS 6

4. East HS 6

5. Noel Community Arts HS 3

6. CEC Middle College 3

7. Venture Prep HS 2

8. DCIS at Montbello HS 2

9. Thomas Jefferson HS 2

10. George Washington HS 2

*Totals only included for 9th ,10th, and 11th graders

School Name#

Assigned

1. Collegiate Prep Academy 14

2. Noel Community Arts HS 6

3. George Washington HS 4

4. High Tech Early College HS 4

5. Thomas Jefferson HS 4

6. Manual HS 3

7. Venture Prep HS 3

8. MLK Jr HS 2

9. DSST GVR 2

10. Denver School of the Arts HS 1


Appendix: 2015 Round 1 Results

34

83%91% 94% 95% 96%

74%

86%91% 93% 94%

77%

90%94% 95% 95%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


2015-16 Results By Grade Level

Kinder 6th 9th

Executive Summary


Documents

Analysis of 2015 Round 1 School Choice - BoardDocs