[Morton Mayor Norman] Durflinger, former superintendent of Morton Unit District 709 and who also sat on the Center for the Study of Education Policy at Illinois State University, was hired as the interim treasurer for District 150.
Joining Durflinger as the district’s interim controller is Brock Butts, former Tremont superintendent. The pair will be paid a combined $500 a day, until District 150 is able to find a permanent replacement for the vacancies, made Feb. 17, when the School Board approved putting treasurer/controller Guy Cahill on administrative leave. That contract officially will end in April.
Additionally, the School Board approved hiring Michael J. McKenzie, a certified public accountant, to fill a new position: chief accountant and director of internal audits and external assurances. He will be paid $90,000 annually.
I don’t know about you, but this certainly helps my confidence level in the school board. It looks like they’re making a serious effort to get the finances under control and finally address auditors’ concerns that have been ignored for several years. This is the best news to come out of 3202 N. Wisconsin in a long time.
Regarding special education at Richwood – My impression is that there is a sizeable portion of special education students at Richwoods and that this is the facility that has been chosen to educate this group of students. I am not sure about that. If so, then this feeds into the cost per pupil figure at Richwoods, and depending on the number of special education students serviced at the facility, it could drive up the average cost per pupil considerably. I just wanted to understand.
Regarding special services – I can’t speak for whether such services are necessary or unnecessary, I just think they are a drain on the available resources of the District. Didn’t I just read that the Board recently authorized the purchase of new science books for some grade to replace a text that was more than a decade old!!! Maybe if we did not have to employ so many home facilitators, etc., the District would have money to upgrade the basics, like textbooks.
Regarding Mr. Broderick, HR Director – Before Mr. Broderick was hired the District’s HR was in a mess. This I know for sure. He was hired for a salary no greater than those that held the job before who were less qualified. I imagine the District’s legal counsel continues to handle actual defense of lawsuits but undoubtedly Mr. Broderick has been able to cure some deficiencies that made the District ripe for disaster.
Frustrated: You could be right about Richwoods having more special ed students than are at the other high schools–but I certainly have never heard that. I thought Manual had the most because it is the only Title I high school. I’m showing my ignorance here–is special ed funded through Title I or through some other federal or state program?
Yes, the board just did replace science books (I thought I remember hearing 14 years old). And that is unacceptable. Over the 43 years of my teaching career, I believe that more and more non-classroom personnel has been hired. I’m sure there is a need–that students require social and psychological services. I’m just not sure that the schools should be asked to take on this responsibility. I believe the funding should come from some place else and that students should be referred to outside agencies to get help in these areas. I’m making this up as I go–haven’t given that much thought to it before. However, I still maintain that there isn’t that much of a carry over into the classroom to warrant the cost of these special services.
I agree. Teachers have been educated to teach. Social services is a different major!
I am not speaking specifically of District 150 but generally, public schools have become a dumping ground for all the issues society has failed to deal with and because there are no social service nets for these children to fall into.
I know of situations at the District where students were continually returned to school and were so flawed socially and psychologically that they should never have been placed in a regular school setting. They were so disturbed — they were ill. But when you are the educator of last resort, like District 150, it is difficult legally to turn student away.
Frustrated: Yes, in my last few years of teaching I realized that I was trying to cope with a significant number of young people who were really ill–bi-polar, all sorts of emotional illnesses, sometimes a danger to themselves and others. Certainly, I sympathized and realized these weren’t the typical discipline problems, but help has to come from somewhere else–not the public school classroom.
I will have to look at the schools’ report cards, however, Richwoods may have a higher number of a particular category of SPED students but I am almost certain Woodruff and Central have much higher numbers of SPED students. PHS and WHS have many more students who fall under other categories. I assure you the district would never put a behaviorally disordered classroom at Richwoods.
Regarding the HR situation, I can’t help but wonder why people (secretaries) keep leaving HR. I know HR was in bad shape prior to the current director due to not having a director for a long time, but I hear that department is a mess and morale is very low. Again, that is what I have heard. They may have some new procedures in place as far as paperwork etc… but I have heard the day to day operations are chaotic.
Serenity – you may be correct. It is my impression that Mr. Broderick knows his stuff when it comes to labor and employment, but that does not mean he is a great manager of staff. Also, Charles Davis (I think that was his name) did not add any value, so Mr. Broderick has been flying solo since he arrived at the District. In Mr. Broderick’s defense, he probably could use a good wing man to manage the day-to-day HR matters, as I imagine he is pulled into high-level meetings to fight the fires, that we are all too familiar with. I think one HR manager for a school district with such a large staff (what about 2500 employees) and so many different unions is not sufficient. Maybe they could deploy one of those “consultants” to help in HR.
I used to interact with the District HR fairly frequently a few years back and I was surprised to see so many clerks in that area. It seemed that there were too many things being performed manually and there were efficiences to be had. This comment is not meant to reflect on the quality of the workers but rather the manner in which the District was having them perform the work. Wasn’t a new computer software installed by the District in 2006?? of which I thought an aspect of it was the managment of employee data? I may be way off base?
I’m not up on the computer software–but I think it might be called Skyward. At least, that’s what teachers use to record grades, keep attendance, write referrals, etc. I’m really not sure if that is the system that board room employees use to manage data.
Frustrated and others:
Sorry for the late reply. MY wireless networl decided to funk out. Seriously, it’s still not up but we live close enough to BU to bogart off the free internet!
Regarding the amount of SPED students at Richwoods; about 12 years ago the MCA program, which serves seriously/multiply developmentally/physically disabled students had Richwoods added to their high school sites. Previously, since WWII, all these students had been housed at Peoria High and that was the only site for these students (in wheelchairs, etc.) The change was due to a couple of parents (I can name them) who threatened lawsuits and a director who caved. Once that happened, some (many) parents wanted their children at the “safer” site which they perceived as RCHS. Those monies are considerable due to the high cost of educating those students. So both PHS and RCHS numbers would be inflated due to these students if there is no differentiation in per pupil cost demographics.
RE: “regular” SPED students ( I know it’s an oxymoron) — there are a lot of them at PHS and I assume at WHS and MHS also. They just weren’t in the MCA mix. These students have different class size restrictions and would affect per pupil costs, since class sizes per adult, etc. would be in effect. The fact is that WE DON’T KNOW what numbers for class size the D150 numbers are based on. We would like to! Is it apples to apples or apples to everything?
Another post soon on BD/ED students which I KNOW PHS has a lot more of than RCHS. This week we had students sent to jail, the hospital and suspension, while others who were expelled weeks ago are still in class because the action hasn’t been completed and we are legally obligated to let them attend. We do our best to educate them and keep them from hurting themselves or others. We aren’t always successful.
Once I get my wireless connection fixed and my father settled, I’ll post more.
Thanks for ALL comments even those I disagree with.
Skyward is the pc based system designed for small school districts with a few administrative computers that Cahill crammed down 150’s throat when he threw out the IBM AS400 system which had tied the district’s accounting, payroll, human resources, student records, purchasing, fixed assets and communications all together. Once the AS400 system was scrapped the Skyward has limped along with its inferior capabilities. There were horror stories of data that was forever lost, data that could never be collected again, and major holes in the internal accounting controls that Skyward just simply lacked. Fast forward and you have finally read what the auditors reported. Guess we should say “thank you, Cahill, for implementing an inferior system!”
As for the human resources dilemma I hear that it boils down to a matter of lack of respect of the boss as a person. As for the former 2nd in command Davis, he is Hinton’s son in law. Doesn’t that say something too?
I will not compromise myself nor this blog with dialogue about either Broderick nor Davis, but it’s out there if you ask insiders. Suffice it to say it’s just more of the management cancer that Hinton’s incompetence has brought to District 150.
Thanks Hot in the City and Without Malice. Your thoughts are very enlightening. So let’s get this straight, District 150 does not have adequate or appropriate computer services to meet its needs and they are dealing with a considerable number of students that are seriously challenged and/or out of control, possibly beyond the scope of which a teacher is trained to handle. I can’t imagine why the District’s attendance numbers are dropping!
The district has chosen to focus on other things such as Pacific Institute for the staff instead of the behavioral concerns of students. When people spoke up and told central office staff they could professional develop teachers to death in the areas of math, reading etc…, but, until they can get students’ behavior under control teachers can not teach and kids can not learn, the central administrators had a look of “you’re crazy” on their faces. They do not get it. You have people making decisions that have never been in an inner city school (expect maybe for a drop-in visit) and they have no teaching or adminstrative experience in an inner city school. Some only taught for a couple of years (not in Peoria) then made a career change then later came back to public schools in central office positions.
hot in the city: as far as the situation at PHS, if any of the “expelled” students that are still in school are special ed, you can start asking the director of special education why.
Serenity: We just have to keep preaching this message (kids can’t learn until behavior is controlled) until someone hears us. Even those on the board who recognize the problem keep buying into the wrong solutions. I can’t tell you how many times I heard something to the effect that if teachers would “engage the students,” the behavior problems would go away. It is the old chicken vs. egg argument. As several of us have pointed out recently, some of these young people are clinically ill with some serious psychological disorders–they cannot be engaged without serious intervention or–better yet–a more suitable learning environment. I guess no one wants to acknowledge that some are drug and/or alcohol dependent. Also, I hope by now everyone knows that expulsion is not a solution. Most people when they hear the word “expelled,” they think it is a final action. Expulsion is only temporary in almost all cases. Sometimes expulsion lasts only 1 month or two–usually until the beginning of a new semester. Then the disruptive student can return to continue the same old behaviors and start once again on the often “long” path to a second expulsion.
serenity, didn’t you know that people are not allowed to ask the director of special ed anything… you might get harassed to death and lose your job if you start asking anyone in Admin anything. But, this has also been the case even if you don’t ask.
Does anyone know anything about a lawsuit filed by teacher at, I believe Greeley, against Hinton and Dist 150 for discrimination?
Also, CJ… did you ever hear anything back on the FOIA for consultants?
Lisa Madigan is trying to get the law changed regarding government bodies that do not honor Foias. I wonder if Dist 150 would come under that and be able to be fined when they do not comply.
Teacher “s,” as in more than one! I understand there is a group of employees suing for discrimination….
I don’t know about C.J.’s FOIA, but I have one pending from the same time period as his. Stacey Shangraw was ill last week, but when I contacted her, she offered to give me the portion of my request that was ready–or to wait for all of it. Of course, I do have some questions about why the information isn’t readily available–which, to me, is more revealing than if it had been available.
I have found Stacey to be very cooperative. At least, all of my requests have always been honored. Granted, she is only the middle man.
Regarding the lawsuits, etc.: Frankly, at the moment I believe that teachers are not being properly represented or supported by the union–administration might well be taking advantage of this situation. Someone on this blog has already mentioned that more teachers than usual might be receiving unsatisfactory evaluations. I have no problem with appropriate negative evaluations of non-tenured teachers, but I am hearing that administrators aren’t following evaluation procedures–that they are labeling teachers as unsatisfactory but not backing up the accusations with the appropriate documentation.
I remember the evaluation process for non-tenured teachers requiring very little in the way of rationale as to why a school does not wish to retain a new teacher? Has the evaluation requirements changed?
What type of discrimination are these teachers alledging?
Frustrated: I do think the evaluation process (for unsatisfactory) has changed–certainly, for tenured teachers. I think I may have given the wrong impression in an earlier post. I think the recent questionable “unsatisfactories” might well be for tenured teachers–and they do require documentation. I don’t think non-tenured teachers are protected that much by the union.
I’m also curious about the nature of the discrimination allegations.
Please let me say that any special ed student who is “expelled” by law, they are to be placed in an alternative placement, not out of school completely. However, the current director of special education who knows nothing about inner city schools (except to read about them) is insisting these kids stay in the regular building. She just does not get it.
Also, I know for a fact in one tenured teacher’s eval, her supervisor DID NOT follow proper procedures. No conference with her during the first six weeks of school, no post observation conference, the supervisor did not have the teacher fill out the observation form, etc… I think the supervisor needs some professional development on evaluations. It’s a witch hunt in district 150 in certain areas. They are going after people I think because of personality conflicts etc., not performance.
Serenity: I agree totally on both subjects.
It is a witch hunt, but I am finding that it isn’t just personalities they are after, but qualified, long-term, highly educated employees who make more money than a newer employee would make. After all, wouldn’t it help their budget to have less knowledgeable, less experienced people on staff who are so thankful to have a job that they will never say anything against administration. And if you get injured on the job… Whoa! Look who’s in HR… a labor attorney! Can’t go there for help…
As for union leadership…… there isn’t any.
If you ask teachers in the S. end about the lawsuit… I’m sure you will find out. I do not know how long it has been going on.
Re” Witch hunt. I know there are those of you who do not like the idea of teacher tenure. However, if ever an institution needed “Whistle Blowers,” it would be District 150. Few administrative “offenses” and bad decisions hurt only teachers. I do believe that many of you have learned much about conditions in 150 schools from reading this and other blogs–probably from teachers. At least, I don’t believe any administrators are speaking out. Even tenure doesn’t protect teachers enough to encourage them to come forth with information that should be made public. Yes, MAWoman, I agree about the less experienced staff being an advantage for administrators. It is possible that that situation exists at Manual this year with so many non-tenured teachers. At least, it’s a distinct possibility.
You are certainly right about the lack of union leadership. I understand the current president is burned out and won’t be running in April. However, there will be two candidates for president of PFT, and, of course, I strongly recommend Jeff Adkins-Dutro. I am prejudiced but I also know how very well qualified Jeff is.
As for union leadership…… there isn’t any.
Hopefully this will change as of April. Have you bought your tickets yet? 😉
http://pundit.blogpeoria.com/2009/03/03/support-adkins-dutrohedy-elliott-for-prezvp-of-peoria-fed-of-teachers/
Serenity,
You are correct about SPED students being put into alternative placement. They are not just “at home” with no education. One option is home tutoring. I have no comment about admin as I want to keep my job. I do believe many admins have good intentions, but the fact that they are not in the classrooms every day with the current student demographic is, I believe, detrimental to their decisions.
In the case to which I referred, the alternative placement has already been determined (and all meetings held) but the student is still at (local high school) and has NO reason to behave as there isn’t anything that can be done to consequent him. Demerits? So what! Suspension? Not an option.
Until he is removed to the alternative placement he remains in his current classroom, and, believe me, he knows that nothing can be done to him. He disrupts class virtually daily. And other students are aware of his circumstances and see that he can misbehave (weak word!) and have no consequences, so they act out as well. I absolutely don’t want students to be at home not receiving an education, but it has been weeks since his expulsion hearing. Another example of good idea in theory but not in practice.
This is not the only case of which I am aware, it is just a current situation where I have first-hand knowledge.
Trying to post and watch BU-UNI. Have to stop posting as game is close! Stay informed and keep asking questions, all.
This is why so many are identified as “Spec Ed” within the District, because is offers much more cover from expulsion. Is some ways, the District is held hostage by some over protective spec ed laws. Strong union leadership on a local and statewide level, along with administrative associations should be lobbying the legislature to revise laws to be more applicable to an ever changing student population and the economic times. Valuable educational resources are wasted on those that are not able or are unwilling to learn.
Hot in the City states “I absolutely don’t want students to be at home not receiving an education” Why not? The situation Hot describes indicates that the student is not taking advantage of the education being offered in the school setting, and he/she is disrupting the environment for everyone else. What is the act of expulsion really denying this individual, except the opportunity to create a nightmare for the school and staff?
Maybe it is time to begin considering all the other students that are interested in studying, many of which have had to overcome obstacles and challenges in life as well. Anything that gets in the way of these students’ efforts should be removed.
Frustrated: I generally agree with you, but then sometimes your solutions become a little too harsh. First of all, ignoring these children was the way things used to be. I don’t want to return to that era of callousness. I do agree that too many excuses are made for these young people–especially, for their behaviors. However, I don’t believe that they are labeled as special ed just so they can’t be expelled.
I find myself wondering if children with special needs have increased in the last 50 plus years or if the number of children with developmental problems was the same but just went undiagnosed.
My own experience with special ed kids (those that were mainstreamed into regular classes) is that they were often better behaved and more motivated than kids in my basic classes who sometimes had more developmental and emotional problems than those who had been “labeled.” Frankly, I believe that many of the discipline problems in our schools might be “special ed,” but haven’t been tested or do not meet the guidelines. I guess I honestly don’t believe that it is the “diagnosed” special ed kids that are creating most of the discipline problems.
Maybe we can agree that special ed kids who are severe discipline problems should not be pampered or given opportunities that do not benefit them. Also, I definitely agree that these young people should not be in regular classrooms.
What I think is harsh is when a student, spec ed or otherwise, detracts from the learning process.
I think the public education system has become upside down in the last decade or more, with an increasing emphasis on catering to those who cannot or will not take advantages of the opportunities presented in favor of those students that sit ready and waiting to learn.
I agree to the extent (large extent) that those ready to learn should not be held back by those who aren’t. However, like it or not, society (pubglic schools) has to deal with and/or help those that aren’t ready–because they just can’t be ignored. I do agree, however, that we have made excuses where excuses might not be necessary. Public schools do need to look at some other options and some new ways of handling these difficullt situations. As I’ve said before, maybe if administrators would start listening to teachers, they would be better able to assess the problemz and come up with the right solutions.
Frustrated – you nailed it. That is a big reason people are leaving the district. They have children who are ready, willing and able to learn but can’t because of chronic unrest in the classroom.