That was just one of the questions parents had for District 150 administrators last night at Kellar Primary School. The idea they want to stop is a proposal to reduce the school day by 45 minutes at 12 primary schools starting next year in order to save between $600,000 and $750,000 per year. Presentations were made by Kellar principal Ken Turner, D150 Strategic Planner Thom Simpson, and Assistant Superintendent Cheryl Sanfilip. Then questions were taken from the audience, estimated to be about 60 parents.

The questions were almost all critical of the plan. One person asked if this decision was budget-driven or academically-driven. (Dr. Simpson said it was both.) Several people asked about how much flexibility schools would have to set their own schedule and decide which special teachers to have. One complained that the school district was shifting the burden (and expense) of additional education time to parents to provide outside tutoring for whatever is cut from the school day. Another asked why we can’t save some money on the administration side.

Here’s the Journal Star’s report on the evening. And here’s HOI News’ report.

Not mentioned in these reports is the one question that kept coming up over and over again: What about Edison schools? Under the proposal, no changes would be made to the two Edison primary schools, Northmoor and Franklin, which already have a longer school day than other district schools. Many parents expressed concern about the disparity, asking why twelve schools have to bear $600,000 in educational cuts while we send $1 million to for-profit Edison schools, which only benefit a small percentage of District 150 students.

Good question.

By the way, the answer to the headline question is to contact your school board members:

David Gorenz
President (Dist. 3)
(309) 688-2824
david.gorenz@psd150.org

Martha M. Ross
Vice-President (Dist. 1)
(309) 674-2574
martha.ross@psd150.org

Linda Butler
(Dist. 2)
(309) 688-7912
linda.butler@psd150.org

Rachael A. Parker
(Dist. 2)
(309) 688-5990
rachael.parker@psd150.org

Mary Spangler
(Dist. 3)
(309) 691-1752
mary.spangler@psd150.org

Jim Stowell
(Dist. 3)
(309) 692-4128
jim.stowell@psd150.org

Debbie Wolfmeyer
(Dist. 3)
(309) 681-9567
debbie.wolfmeyer@psd150.org

To e-mail all board members at once, click here.

Hinton also recommended the new “birth through eighth-grade” school [replacing Glen Oak School in the East Bluff] be a choice school, meaning students may come from anywhere in the district, as well as incorporating year-round schooling, a specialized autistic program, a longer school day and parental contracts, requiring more involvement from parents.

— Journal Star, 1/8/2008

In the fall, [a restructured] Manual [High School] will reopen, officials say, as a much different place. Ninth-graders will be isolated among the rest of the student population in what is being called the ninth-grade academy; a seventh-and eighth-grade academy, made of about 80 students each, will be added; the school day and calendar will be longer; parents will be required to devote time at the school; and the school itself will undergo a facelift as well as compartmentalization to accommodate the different learning academies.

— Journal Star, 4/22/2008

So, let me see if I have this straight. Manual was not doing well academically, so they’re restructuring — that is, making changes that will help improve the educational experience there, which will manifest itself (hopefully) in higher test scores. One of those changes is a longer school day.

Furthermore, Superintendent Ken Hinton recommended just three months ago a longer school day for the new school that will be built in the East Bluff, replacing Glen Oak Primary School. I presume he recommended this because he thinks it has pedagogical benefits. Isn’t that also why Edison schools have a longer school day than other District 150 schools?

So, now I’m trying to figure out this quote from today’s paper:

Despite less time at school, many principals say the proposed schedule change [i.e., shortening the school day] improves classroom instruction by eliminating interrupted teaching, allows for more classroom flexibility and gives teachers common planning time in the morning before students arrive.

How about that! Longer school days improve classroom instruction, but surprisingly so do shorter days. Evidently, the only length of time that’s bad is the current length of the school day, which is six and a half hours. Somehow, this precise length of the school day is detrimental to academic success. Make it longer or shorter — it makes no difference which way you go — and things magically improve! I hope they publish this new finding, because it will be helpful to other school districts around the country. Beware the six-and-a-half hour school day! Keep scores high; avoid six-point-five!

I’m assuming the logic curriculum got cut from District 150 a long time ago.

From Peoria.com:

You may or may not be aware that the members of the District 150 School Board are preparing to vote on proposed changes that may substantially impact your child’s elementary school education.

Part one of the proposal calls for SHORTENED SCHOOL HOURS. If passed, school hours will be reduced by 45 minutes each day. The proposed new start time for Primary schools (at least for Kellar) will be 9:15 a.m.

Secondly, specialized instruction in gym, science, music and computers is on the chopping block. Primary schools will only be allowed the equivalent of two full time special teacher positions. The home room teachers must then assume responsibility for these subjects, regardless of their training or background.

Our initial reaction, as parents, is one of concern that our children’s education may be compromised as a result of these changes. We feel that there are alternative cost cutting measures that can and should be taken first that would not put the burden of the deficit squarely on the backs of our young children. As parents, we have the right to expect adequate education and exposure to the arts and sciences in our public schools.

The School Board argues that these proposed changes, in addition to saving the district money, will actually enhance the educational experience. They feel that less time will be spent transitioning children between classes, and that classroom time will be more devoted to learning.

You be the judge! We have arranged an informational meeting to take place at Kellar this Thursday evening, May 1st at 5:15 p.m. District Administrators have confirmed that they will be present to answer your questions and address your concerns.

Time is of the essence. This proposal is being fast-tracked and may very well be voted on at the next School Board meeting on May 5th.

It is our responsibility to watchdog the School Board and Administration to make sure that the Districts limited resources are being allocated in a way that is most beneficial to our children. We cannot entrust this responsibility to teachers or school staff, as their very employment is dependant upon the actions of the aforementioned entities.

We hope to see a very large and concerned presence of District 150 parents on Thursday. We then hope to have a very large group of informed parents at the School Board meeting on May 5th.

The Journal Star has a front-page story on this today as well.

“Well, I guess you can cut the arts as much as you want, Gene. Sooner or later, these kids aren’t going to have anything to read or write about.”

–Glenn Holland, “Mr. Holland’s Opus,” 1995

I went to Whittier Primary School this morning. My kids will be going there next fall (I’m sure District 150’s administration is thrilled — I’ll have so much more to blog about now). Jackie, my oldest, has been going to a private school. It’s a small Christian school that’s been struggling to reach critical mass and just couldn’t do it, so it will be closing at the end of the school year. She’ll be going into third grade. Maggie, my youngest daughter, will be entering kindergarten.

So we went to the “Kindergarten Roundup” this morning to meet the principal — interim principal, as it turns out — and the teachers, and take a little tour of the school, and take a bus ride around the block. It was a fun morning.

One of the things we (and some other parents new to the school) wanted to know was what time school started and ended. I thought the answer was a little odd. “This year, school starts at 8:45″ and “lets out at 3:15.”

This year? Why the disclaimer?

Well, as it turns out, I had missed a very important part of the story on this past Monday’s school board meeting. Apparently, one of the school district’s efforts at saving money is to shorten the school day and cut some of the arts in the process:

But officials early on in the meeting Monday said job cuts may not be on the horizon, alluding to discussing late into the night the option of shortening the school day for primary students and their teachers instead. Students would have 45 fewer minutes at school; teachers’ days would be a half-hour shorter.

The savings, officials said, were estimated at $600,000 to $750,000 by reducing what’s spent on part-time prep teachers. An additional $45,000 to $60,000 would be saved by eliminating missed prep periods.

Scheduling changes would make up for some of the lost day and art or music classes could take some of the cuts, officials said, not essentials such as math and reading. That measure is expected to be discussed more at the May 5 board meeting.

Make the day shorter, and cut the arts. That’s how they’re considering saving money. Oh, but they won’t cut “essentials,” such as multiple superintendents math and reading. It’s interesting that they don’t see the arts as “essential.” Research shows:

• Learning in the Arts is Academic. Learning experiences in the arts contribute to the development of academic skills, including the areas of reading and language development and mathematics.
• Learning in the Arts is Basic. Arts learning experiences contribute to the development of certain thinking, social and motivational skills that are considered basic for success in school, life and work. These fundamental skills encompass a wide range of more subtle, general capacities of the mind, self-perceptions and social relationships.
• Learning in the Arts is Comprehensive. The arts help create the kind of learning environment conducive to teacher and student success by fostering teacher innovation, a positive professional culture, community engagement, increased student attendance, effective instructional practice and school identity.

But hey, gotta save money somewhere. It only makes sense to cut multiple superintendents instruction time and the arts.

Hat tip: Billy Dennis and PeoriaIllinoisan.

From the Journal Star:

Instead of a $2 million surplus for 2008-09, Treasurer Guy Cahill told the board that reduced revenues will leave the district with a $2 million deficit. About $200,000 of that is from higher- than-anticipated costs to restructure Manual High School. Another fraction is in dispute with the state. But the main reason the district will have $145 million rather than the anticipated $147 million for next year’s operating budget is cuts by the state of Illinois.

How to plug the gap? HOI News explains:

Superintendent Ken Hinton said he wants to close Loucks-Edison as soon as next year. There was also talk at Monday’s school board meeting about getting rid of all the athletic directors and keeping only one for the entire district. Hinton is also asking for cuts in cafeteria, custodial, maintenance and security staff. He also suggested the district get rid of two central administration positions.

Another school closing. Yet, at the same time, they’ve acquired the former Social Security Administration building on Knoxville — a building they didn’t need — and approved spending $1.27 million out of the Buildings and Grounds fund — because they couldn’t go through the Public Building Commission — to renovate it. And they’re still sitting on $877,000 worth of houses on Prospect Road. Actually, the fair market value of the houses was only $609,540 (District 150 royally overpaid for them), and they’ve since razed one of them (FMV: $60,150), so the properties are probably worth approximately $549,390 at best. And they still have four superintendents on staff.

Getting less state money hurts, but it really hurts when you combine that with what I perceive as mismanagement at the local level.

District 150 will decide tonight whether the new, enlarged Glen Oak School campus will extend north or south of the current campus. The Journal Star reports:

“We need to make a definite decision,” Gorenz said Monday. He wouldn’t elaborate which direction, whether to the north or south, he thought the new school might extend, saying that would be made known tonight.

The district so far has discussed three proposals for expanding the Glen Oak Primary School campus from its current three acres to as many as 12 acres.

So, just what do these possibilities look like? Here are a few options that the school board is considering — two options to expand to the north, and one option to expand to the south. Rumor has it that the southward expansion is favored (click on each picture for larger image):

They still insist on consuming more acreage than they need. These site plans would be appropriate for a suburban school. But for a neighborhood school in an urban area, this is not an appropriate use of land — especially the excessive parking areas. The staff parking lot is more than sufficient — why do they need “bus parking”? And why do they need another parking lot? Are the third-graders driving themselves to school now and need a place to leave their cars during the day? And why is the school building all spread out? Why not build up and take up a smaller footprint?

Is anyone on the school board asking these questions?

UPDATE: The school board did indeed decide on the southward plan. It was pointed out that these drawings (above) are conceptual. They’re not final site plans. The placement and configuration of the building, for instance, may be different than what is shown. It was stated that the public will have input — especially those who live in the Glen Oak School attendance area.

The cost of the project, including property acquisition, is estimated to be $27 million. And that’s the amount the school board will request from the Public Building Commission. School board member Jim Stowell suggested the City should help with property acquisition costs.

I wrote this post originally a bit in haste, as I wanted to get the pictures up as soon as possible. Thus, my comments sounded a bit overly negative. I should have stated that, on the positive side, I am pleased that the school board chose the current Glen Oak School site. It is by far the best location, and they should be applauded for listening to the wishes of the City, neighborhood associations, residents, teachers, et. al.

Nevertheless, I do still have the concerns I noted above. The excessive land requirements are unnecessary and needlessly inflate the price of the school project. Perhaps with some more public input, the school board will scale back the size as well.