Hi everyone, we learned new details about the MI TK-8 plans, or lack thereof, and we’re concerned. Full details below.
Please come tomorrow in-person and give public comment. Only 15 people are coming in-person, so your presence matters. This is the only scheduled Board discussion on the topic before the vote in Aug/Sep, which is only 2 months away.
RSVP for the June 9 Board Meeting on Partiful →
Not sure what to say? Here are some ideas:
- Why this school matters to your family
- The district made a commitment. Now they need to make it happen, on-time
- This school would attract families and grow the district
- We need concrete plans: location, scheduled vote, community engagement at proposed sites
See you tomorrow,
Abby & Justin
Here is the draft presentation and the full Q&A (see section H starting on page 9).
Below is a summary of the SFUSD Board’s questions that were submitted and answered by SFUSD staff in preparation for the Board meeting:
19 possible sites, 0 sites announced. Location is still undecided. 19 sites could physically house the smaller launch, but staff are still narrowing the list. The district says temporary or permanent school site facilities are still on the table. Importantly, the district also acknowledges that multiple existing school sites could accommodate a full 9-classroom launch (3 classrooms each for TK, K and 1st).
Our take: The fact that viable sites exist is encouraging. We believe SFUSD should be transparent now about which sites are under consideration, so impacted communities have adequate time to engage — not two weeks before a vote.
Community engagement is promised — but the clock is ticking. Staff say they’ll engage impacted school communities before finalizing a site. Only 2 months remain to pick a site and engage those communities, yet no sites under consideration have been made public.
Our take: Meaningful community engagement takes time. Announcing sites with weeks to spare — rather than months — is not a real process. We should urge SFUSD to accelerate site disclosure so families, neighbors, and school communities can participate in good faith.
Teacher pipeline is a strength, not a constraint. 26 credentialed Mandarin employees district-wide and 21 new applicants for the 2026–27 school year is a robust number relative to a 4-classroom launch. A credentialing pathway through SF State exists, and para-to-teacher and residency programs are “being considered” — but the near-term pipeline appears healthy enough to support a larger launch than planned.
Our take: This is genuinely good news. We’re encouraged by the district’s investment in Mandarin educator pathways and believe this pipeline is an argument for expanding, not limiting, the launch. However, this data undermines previous statements from the district that the teacher pipeline was a main contributor to a reduced launch size.
The launch size shrank — but there are plenty of locations and teachers. Earlier discussions included 9 classrooms (3 TK + 3K + 3 first grade); the current plan is just 1 TK + 3K (86 students). At scale, the school will have 1–2 TK classrooms. The district cited facilities and teacher pipeline as constraints (and a desire to keep K spots available to attract new families to the district). However, SFUSD staff answers indicate a robust teacher pipeline and multiple school sites that could accommodate the original launch size.
Our take: The cited constraints don’t hold up to scrutiny after reviewing the new data unearthed by Board questions. A larger launch serves more families and builds a healthier, more stable school from day one. We should continue pushing for the district to reconsider launch size in light of the evidence.
The vote is in 2 months. Nobody knows what’s being voted on. Staff acknowledged the vote happens “August/September, if any,” but couldn’t specify what exactly will be voted on because too many upstream decisions — site, co-location vs. standalone — remain unresolved.
Our take: We need a clear timeline and clarity on what is actually required to open this school. SFUSD families and school board were recently blindsided by the district delaying the school reorganization initiative by 3 years, and we need a clear timeline to believe that this school will actually happen.