Well over 100 people crowded into the banquet room at Godfather’s Pizza Thursday night in reaction to District 150’s proposal to balance the budget by closing and consolidating schools. Included in the crowd were teachers, students, coaches, staff members, parents, alumni, and other concerned citizens. The meeting started at 5 p.m. and lasted about an hour and a half. Terry Knapp was the moderator and several people spoke. Here’s a small sampling:
My thanks to Terry, Jeff Adkins-Dutro, and Hedy Elliot-Gardner for letting me publish their comments. Jeff and Hedy are running for union president and vice president, respectively.
In case you didn’t catch it, the plan is to hold a protest outside the District 150 offices on Wisconsin next Tuesday at 5:30 p.m., prior to the board meeting. School board meetings are normally on Mondays, but next Monday is the Martin Luther King, Jr., holiday. The goal is to have 300-400 people from demonstrating against closing Woodruff High and other schools slated for closure.
The concerns with closing schools are many:
- Larger class sizes — When Manual was restructured, the district emphasized that it was important to establish/maintain “small learning communities.” Now they want to combine schools that will lead to large classes of 29+ students. To make matters worse, the district is also trying to take special education children out of their special classes and integrate them into regular classrooms. So now, in addition to having larger class sizes, teachers are going to have the added pressure of helping special ed kids keep up with the rest of the class.
- Mixing rival gangs — I’m not up on Peoria’s gang situation, but several attendees who are aware of it expressed concern about putting a lot of kids from rival gangs in the same school building. It poses a number of security problems.
- Combining of athletic teams — Kids who are able to make the cut for, say, basketball in their respective schools now will end up being cut from the team when players from both high schools are combined to make one team. For some of those kids, sports is what keeps them in school and keeps them connected; and being cut from the team will raise the likelihood of them dropping out.
- Edison schools not on the chopping block — No one can understand why the district wouldn’t cut Edison schools’ contract before closing down schools. A lot of money could be saved by getting rid of that private, for-profit company’s contract.
- Consultants/administrators not on the chopping block — At the same time the administration is talking about closing schools and cutting teachers, they are adding more administrative staff. Why wouldn’t they cut the fat in the administration before they start making cuts that impact students?
As I listened closely to the rally Thursday, I noticed that this was not just about schools closing. There are some deeper issues that are frustrating the teachers. Consider that the teachers and principals found out about the District’s proposal to close and consolidate schools from the press. The assistant principal of Woodruff first heard it on the 10:00 news Wednesday night. It’s bad enough that the administration doesn’t consult their teachers and staff for input on these matters; the least they can do is inform them of their plans before they tell the news media and general public.
There was also frustration that no union representatives were at the meeting Thursday. Many teachers were incensed that Peoria Federation of Teachers president Scott Schifeling wasn’t at the meeting Thursday night, nor was anyone from the union’s executive board. An attendee who had talked to several board members reported to the group that they weren’t attending the meeting because they “felt slighted that they weren’t invited.” Not exactly the way to inspire confidence among the teachers.
Expect a lot of protesters Tuesday night, and a lot of people lined up to speak to the school board during the public comment period of Tuesday’s meeting.
C.J.–Thanks so much for coming to this event and for such good coverage!
There is going to be a negative reaction to this and more people will be looking to get out of the district and send their kids somewhere else. Central can’t handle the kids they have now and sending more will cause problems. People who can afford it will leave. Then the attendance will be even less than it is now. I think cutting the administrators salaries and positions should be looked at first.
Interesting you mention the gang related fights. One of my first reactions was mixing up Woodruff and Central kids would cause all kinds of troubles between students of two different and rivaled schools.
Is this a fight for the students or for the teachers?
After listening to the video it sounds like the teachers are pretty much concerned about the teachers.
and for gods sake- get over the Edison thing already.
These people talking about us against them sounds so much like the CAT union mentality it makes me sick. Are they going to throw jack rocks in the parking lots?
So what do the teachers propose the distict do about the 7-9 million they are going to be short? Are they offering to take a pay cut to help out the cause?
This mixing kids from the schools and having problems is a bunch of BS also. I think some are just making that up to help their cause. I give the kids a lot more credit than that.
Bottom line, the district can not afford nor needs anymore four high schools. Woodruff or Central, one needs to go.
Good coverage, C.J.
Apparently, the PJS was at the meeting, but neglected to mention many of the issues you brought up here, preferring to focus on the narrative, making it seem like it was about hurt feelings and not serious concerns.
Peoriafan – Parents and students were also in attendance–and spoke. They certainly didn’t view this as a “teacher” issue. However, much support was expressed for the teachers by the students and the parents. Be sure to watch Channel 17 next Tuesday, January 20, and listen with an open mind to the students and their parents. Also, if you don’t understand the gang issue, you are far, far removed from the school scene as it is today. I believe there is a story in today’s paper about the young man who brought a gun to Manual and he’s saying it was for protection against gangs. My own opinion is that the gang issue is, for the most part, related to the big business of the drug trade. These kids are fighting over turf and money–and, of course, because they are teen-agers all of it becomes very personal.
Not sure about the rival gang ting as I had heard that Richwoods will get the lions share of these kids anyway and there are not many of any gang members there, until next year that is.
Sorry–but all this inaccurate information needs clarification. The students who will go to Richwoods from Woodruff are in the Von Steuben and Hines area–undoubtedly, not the majority of Woodruff students.
I know first hand that the 8th graders at Von Steuben are good kids and there are NOT gang problems there. That class will be a welcome addition at Richwoods. Most of these kids have gone to school to together since they started at Hines. Anyone that knows anything about Hines and Von Steuben knows what I am talking about.
These are good normal middle class and lower class kids.
Check the Von Steuben test scores- they are above average for 150.
This is an important note to all the Richwoods northsiders who might be worrying about this issue: If you go to Richwoods you have nothing to worry about- the kids from Von Steuben are like the kids from Lindbergh.
I only say this because I know what perceptions people have of kids that go to school south of War Memorial.
FYI-
A good majority of the kids that go to Hines and Von Steuben live north of War Memorial in areas like Bourndale and Knoll Crest.
I happen to be white for those who might be wondering.
“These are good normal middle class and lower class kids. ”
That didn’t sound right- I meant to say “normal middle income and lower income kids”
Please don’t anyone misunderstand any of my comments about gang members in schools–I, by no means, believe they are the majority; most are the “normal middle income and lower income kids” about whom Peoriafan speaks. I do believe that District 150 has not figured out how to deal with (or even acknowledge) the problems in the schools that are created by a minority of students that may or may not be gang members–and that minority (probably increasing because of lack of attention to the problem) create major problems and ruin the educational opportunities of the others who are in the majority. With the merging of Woodruff and Peoria High, these problems will obviously double at PHS–and the district will completely ignore these potential problems–until negative news hits the press; then they will deal with the individual situation and make it sound as though it is an isolated incident..
Anyone who claims that these school closings and increased class sizes are a GOOD thing for students must be somehow entrenched with the Administration. The only way that I will believe that Peoria Fan does not fall into that category is if in fact he identifies himself as such.
If the primary concern for District 150 was the best interests of the students, they would make sizable cuts in administration, travel, benefits, superintendents and consulting fees FIRST. It is becoming embarrassingly obvious who they feel they are in place to serve.
Sorry Diane,
Just a active concerned parent of a student at 150.
I am not defending all the actions of the administration but I am also not bashing every decision they make either like most of you.
ugh, Peoriafan, if that is the case why wouldn’t you say who you are to give your opinions some credibility. No one will egg your house. C’mon this is an important issue. prove that you are not part of the district 150 machine!
Or I could give my name and have some die hard union teacher take it out on my kid at school.
no thanks, not taking the chance. You will just have to trust me.
Hey Anonymous – you go first!
I just found this in an article from December 2, 2008 from the Peoria Times Observer. I thought it was interesting and I do not know what this money is intended for.
“The school district has about $13 million in reserves. But, Cahill said, just throwing that money at the issue will deplete the district’s reserves in less than two years.”
Here is the link to the entire article: http://www.peoriatimesobserver.com/archive/x1772969338/Tough-economic-times-lie-ahead-for-district-150
The article is titled, Tough economic times lie ahead for District 150
A couple of things:
– Edison isn’t on the chopping block for a few important reasons. First, the Edison schools are performing quite well with the model that’s in place. Why remove that? At Northmoor, they actually won the Blue Ribbon this year because they’re eliminating the “achievement gap.” Low income kids are performing similarly (or better) than their middle class peers. Moreover, the Edison program is allowing 150 (at no charge) to use the benchmarking system used in Edison schools to track individual student progress. this is a great value for the district. I also believe that Edison is offering consulting on other issues, etc. My point is that it’s not just 3 schools that are benefiting from the Edison contract — a good number of schools are. Finally, we know from last year’s debacle that the district can’t come close to providing an “Edison-like” program for less money. Full disclosure: my son attends Northmoor and we are thrilled with the quality of his education there. That said, I’d support the program, even if he attended another school.
-Interestingly, I wrote a letter to the Board of Ed this morning about cuts, etc. The email that I sent to Linda Butler was immediately returned to me with this message: “I’m out of the office until 10-20-2008.” Huh? Unless it’s a glitch, I think it might be time for her to turn her email back on!
This is just a little comparison between Charter Oak (non-Edison) and Northmoor (Edison) that I did–and my own conclusions.
In doing these comparisons, I have one major question. Why, in almost all cases, are the Math AYP percentages considerably higher than the Reading AYP? A year ago a primary teacher told me that this difference had become a trend. She attributed it to the district’s over emphasis on math instruction at the expense of an equal emphasis on reading.
Comparison of Northmoor Edison with Charter Oak
Northmoor Demographics
Charter Oak Demographics
The Northmoor before and after Edison is not easy for me to argue because I can’t find the demographics that go back that far. I believe you could easily prove that there were more whites than blacks at Northmoor before Edison. However, I don’t think the low income differences would be that dramatic. In other words, I believe that the African Americans at Northmoor now are more apt to be in higher income brackets than are the African Americans in poverty areas of the city.
Here are the conclusions that I think can be drawn between Northmoor and Charter Oak statistics for the years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 (taken from the Illinois State Report Card).
The demographics are very similar. However:
1. Charter Oak’s white population is lower than Northmoor’s for all four years.
2. Charter Oak’s black population is higher than Northmoor’s for all four years. Try ignoring the white-black comparison and consider only low income.
3. Charter Oak’s low income population is higher than Northmoor’s for all four years.
Even with the low income disadvantage:
1. Charter Oak’s reading AYP was higher than Northmoor’s in 2005 and 2006 and quite competitive in 2007.
2. Charter Oak’s math AYP was higher than Northmoor’s in 2005 and very competitive in 2006 and 2007.
My conclusion: How can the cost of Edison be justified when a non-Edison school with very similar demographics (especially considering that Charter Oak has a higher percentage of low income students) can be so competitive with Northmoor?
PF – Trust me! Haha! Good one.
Here are a few things to think about and perhaps discuss in this forum:
1. Follow the money trail . . .
A. Several years ago, there was an estate bequest specifically designating the use of some undeveloped land on N. University Street for the benefit of PHS. In the past 2-3 years, representatives of the district entered into informal negotiations with the representatives of the estate to change that language so that the land (or sale thereof) could accrue to the benefit of the district. That didn’t work out for the district. How does closing PHS & WHS and opening a consolidated new HS at the old PHS site, affect this bequest?
B. What happens to the funds gifted to the PHS Alum Foundation and WHS Alum group with the legal closing of both schools? To whose benefit will those substantial amounts accrue?
D. Will this new consolidated high school qualify to become a Title I school because of the addition of the low income students from the old WHS attendance area and cause the district to receive increased Title I funding for the new facility?
2. Student life . . .
A. How will this consolidation impact student transportation expense – will it cause the expense to increase or decrease?
B. According to unconfirmed reports, the average class size at RHS averages 15 students. Why doesn’t the proposal include a more equitable distribution of the WHS students and include sending more students than just those in the Hines and Von Steuben attendance areas to Richwoods?
C. Is the district compromising their standing with the IHSA for the new consolidated high school if that school only includes grades 10, 11, & 12?
D. PHS was selected as the location for Preperatory School for Arts partly because that building offered the best stage/performance facility. How is moving that program (rumored to be going to RHS) in the best interest of the students, the program, and student achievement?
E. Does the district own enough property contiguous to the existing PHS facility to build an addition and parking lot without purchasing more parcels of land?
F. How feasible is it in today’s world to have a large school of approximately 2000 students when research is saying that smaller schools in an urban setting are the safest and most desirable learning environment?
Can anyone answer any of these questions?
The question, is, Sharon, not how many low income kids there are, but how are they performing? In the last few years, Charter Oak and Northmoor have had similar outcomes, and I agree, they’re very similar demographically, with hundredths of percentages difference in ethnicity, though I would agree that looking at income through the lens of ethnicity, in the case of these two schools, is not wise.
Yes, Charter Oak has had a slightly higher percentage of low income students (3% difference) in the last few years, but over time, let’s look at a few trends:
1. Northmoor has moved from 25% to 43% low income from 1999 to 2008. In the same time frame, Charter Oak has moved from 40% to 46% low income.
2. In 2002, Northmoor had 62% of students meet & exceed standards on ISAT. by 2007, 91% of students were meeting/exceeding standards. In the same time frame, Charter Oak has moved from 77% to 86% meeting/exceeding.
3. In 2007, there was NO difference in the performance of low income/non-low income students in 4th grade math at Northmoor. While small, a gap did exist at Charter Oak. In reading, a 1% achievement gap existed in 3rd grade for Northmoor students…it was 10% for Charter Oak.
As you say…these conclusions are mine, but these data are very illustrative to me of a few things. First, while the low income level has remained relatively stable at CO, NE has seen an almost 20% increase in low income students. While increasing low income enrollment, NE has had a 30% overall gain in the percentage of students meeting/exceeding standards on their annual tests. That amount of change is not seen at CO…they’ve had a 9% net gain in test scores in 7 years. The achievement gap is narrower at NE than at CO. So, despite having similar demographics NOW, they haven’t always been, and in total, Northmoor has enjoyed dramatic increases in student performance under the Edison program.
Can I say that all the increases are due to Edison? No. But I do know that increased professional development for teachers, more instructional support, and benchmarked learning have been tremendously effective for Northmoor’s students. It is for those reasons that I’m a stringent supporter of this program. I haven’t done an exhaustive search, but I think that you’d be hard pressed to find schools that have had similar increases which have remained steady, continue to trend positively, and have had increases of low income students at the same time. To me, that justifies the cost of Edison. While similar on paper if you look at the last few years, they haven’t always been!
Prarie Celt raises some excellent points. Point D was discussed last night. The merger of Woodruff and PHS would most likely create a second Title I High School (Manual being the only one now). Indeed that would bring more Title I money into the district (possibly the method in their madness), but having another Title I school in 150 will only drive more parents away to the suburbs, to private schools, or to home schooling–the Title I stigma is not good for the district’s reputation.
F – That point was also made last night. The district changes its tune, depending on how the wind blows. Just last year with Manual’s restructuring plan smaller learning communities were advocated–now a school of 2,000.
The average class size of “15” is extremely misleading. Because some special classes and special ed classes have small class sizes, the overall average class size figures are very misleading. Special ed classes may have under 10 students while regular division classes may have 30+. To avoid this misconception, the rule should read, “No teacher will have more than ____ students in his/her class”–but the district would never make a promise like that.
B. The district pays no attention to “minor” details like money bequeathed to a particular school.
All in all, in my opinion, the district makes a list of only the advantages of their plans–they ignore the negatives, assuming everything will work out.
JC–I guess you’re not Mary Spangler in disguise, but your arguments are similar to hers. Whenever I have these discussions with Mary, I feel as though we’re both going in circles. That’s when I know why I was an English teacher, not a math teacher–all these numbers do give me a headache.
Also, C.J.,–did you sneak in and help me out with my charts–I know it didn’t happen by magic, so thanks!
The Very Reverend Linda Butler asked that I take her name off my email list. Do you suspose it was something I said??
Hmmmmm.
Read my blog on a major partial solution to #150’s problems. The old tradional system hasn’t worked in years and won’t ever work again so like the Big O, I call for CHANGE.
Nope, I’m not Mary Spangler. I just happen to agree with her. 🙂
JC Friberg
-Parent of 2nd grader at Northmoor-Edison
-Former 150 speech-language pathologist (1997-2005)
-ISU professor (2005-present)
Hi JC,
First of all, I for one appreciate your willingness to come forward and say who you are. If more people were like you, the level of discourse would greatly improve.
I’m glad that your children and the children of Northmoor Edison are succeeding under the Edison plan. Surely you would concede though that a degree of that success is a result of increased time in school and enhanced resources available only to Northmoor Edison children. What are your feelings regarding the cost of the Edison project and its impact upon the general funds available to educate all the children of D150?
Diane,
If more people came forward, there would be more people out of a job!
For the way some of you talk, that may be true! Lol!
I am a parent of two children in the district. Our daughter goes to Manual and we have honestly had nothing but problems since the school year began.
Our son goes to Valeska; only problem there has been with the school lunches. We take cold lunch now to avoid the problem, which we shouldn’t have to be forced to do, but that is the least of the problems in district 150.
Our entire city has MANY problems that go unaddressed or are addressed by the “blowing of smoke” to cover up the issue/problem.
*Padman’s comment is completely on-key. Many people will, and surely are, making plans to get out of the district. We are one of those families! But until that time comes we are forced to deal with the issues that are plaguing our schools and the education of our children.
We are sick and tired of all the problems in our schools and communities. The gang and drug problem is HUGE! My daughter is actually in fear of being at school. Manual was, in my opinion, a “cover up” for the more major problems in our schools.
This schools seems to be a place for trouble makers to attend; sort of “smelling like” alternative school to me. There was no real “selection” process when it came to which students would be “accepted” into the Manual program. Grades didn’t matter, nor did behavior; if it did at least half of the kids shouldn’t be there.
My child is an A/B student who enjoys school for the learning, not the “hanging out” and everything else that seems to go on at Manual. She is being hindered due to the time that the teachers are having to spend reprimanding kids and addressing other issues, not pertaining to educating our children.
When I spoke to the administration at the school at the beginning of the school year I was appalled at the fact that I was told that this was not a “Roosevelt” or a “Washington”. That comment was true, it CERTAINLY is not. On the other hand the administration did not bother to mention that Manual was not a “Greely” which is what appears to actually be. As will many other schools in the district if we close schools and consolidate students.
The administration then proceeded to tell my husband and I that maybe this school was not a place for my child to be!!!! Amazing resoultion to the problem at hand; tell parents to send their kids somewhere else. That’s a great idea, that way those that would speak negatively of the school are weeded out!!!!!!! Especially becasue we wouldn’t want it to become public knowledge that this “special” school that was suppose to do so much good in our community is nothing but a farce!
Why is it that administrators are not willing to discuss a pay cut for themselves?
What about all the money we are funneling into the new “Glen Oak School” project and the “Impact Zone”? We live in that neighborhood (outside the 2 block radius) and whether the city and the school board want to admit it, that is a joke as well!
They truely do not care about the area that lies outside the 2 block radius. The focus is solely on that particular 2 block area. The 2 block radius has been bought up and the ground is practically cleared, BUT the problems of the area/neighborhood have not ceased. Maybe in that 2 block radius since there are no homes!! This is just another way the city and the district have decided to “mask” the underlying problems.
If we have no money why are we trying to build a new school??????
I, personally, pray that people do move out of the city of Peoria and leave it a “ghost” town. The phrase “it plays in Peoria” is true when it comes to crime, problems with schools and the city as a whole. Criminals run this city and the schools which lie within this city.
We need someone from outside of Peoria city government and the school board to come in, review, and address the issuses objectively. It seems that Peoria has a lot to hide from its citizens and the cover up needs to end!
Angela, the district had an opportunity to have a world reknowned School reformer come to Peoria, and they were not interested. Apparently, they know it all.
http://peoriarocks.blogspot.com/2008/07/meanwhile-down-in-bayou.html
Angela, you are not suffering from paranoid delusions. I have heard this frequently. Scary isn’t it? The fact that enrollment suggests that schools should close is a disturbing fact in and of itself. People are fleeing, yet, they continue to add to and prop up Administration and consultant costs. Seriously, at this rate District 150 will be nothing more than a PO Box to which we mail their checks.
Diane, your question is a valid one. Here’s my best answer: Yes, kids at Northmoor (and other Edison schools) are in school a bit longer, but I don’t’ know that it would explain, in any large measure, Northmoor’s excellent progress.
The students at Edison have a broader range of course offerings and receive 2 special classes a day, which supports the inclusion of the 45 minutes of professional development each Edison teacher participates in daily. So, during my son’s “extra” 45 minutes of class time each day, he gets exposed to Spanish, technology, science, etc. Certainly reading and math overlap in these areas, but it’s not time allocated to the direct teaching of math and/or reading. Certainly, these courses would have a positive impact in a number of areas and would likely impact overall learning…that’s the point, right?
So, my feelings about the impact of the money spent on Edison upon the general education funds for all children…First, I believe strongly in school choice. Every primary school student in Peoria has the ability to attend an Edison school. So, these opportunities via Edison are available to those families that wish to pursue them. I think that levels out the impact of the spending on Edison, as it’s an option open to all. Additionally, as a taxpayer, my annual “contributions” are being spent on magnet schools, performing arts academies, team sports, etc. My son doesn’t partake in any of them, but together, they provide “something for everyone,” if that makes sense. Finally, as I mentioned in an earlier post, Edison is providing services for all students as part of the cost of operating the three Edison schools in Peoria. They are providing their benchmark program to track individual student achievement, which benefits all students through at least 8th grade (I’ve heard that students up to grade 10 can be tracked, though, and it might be that is actually what is happening…).
Overall, I don’t begrudge the spending and wouldn’t, even if my son didn’t attend an Edison school. I think that there are other ways that money can be saved then by eliminating a program that is clearly working for our kids. Lets look (as you’ve mentioned, Diane) to consultants, re-hired retirees, three superintendents, etc. That’s what should be on the agenda Tuesday night…
JC – The extra time in the classroom, the broader range of classes, that are offered to Edison students should be available to all students. Please don’t say that Edison schools are open to all students–if their parents so choose. There are two primary Edison schools and now only one middle school. If all parents would decide to go the Edison route, there would not be enough space in the three schools for all 150 students; therefore, no one can say with any honesty that the schools are available to all students. Also, if the extra time for common planning is so very important to good teaching, then all 150 teachers should have that time available to them–not to mention the extra pay that Edison teachers are paid. Essentially, because of the extra time and extra subject matter, students at the Edison schools and their parents are getting more from their (and our) taxpayer dollars than are the students at Kellar, Charter Oak, and, of course, the south side schools. Private schools are not, and should not be, expected to provide equal education to all; public schools, however, should.
Wouldn’t it be nice if administration from Dist. 150 would honor their own values that they have plastered at the top of their website: Excellence, Collaboration, Respect, Integrity, Communication, Accountability.
Peoria District 150 consultants = The Friends of Hinton Club!
ImaSwede – Gee, I thought it was the Ken Hinton friends and family hiring plan!
Is it a fact that class size will increase? Will they retain some teachers and simply make more classrooms at other schools? In other words, since they are going to a K thru 8 type school, and put this school at Woodruff, couldn’t there simply be more smaller sized classes for each grade?
Please, the district is broke. A lot of school districts are broke. Point and blame but they are bloke and have to make cuts. They should close a high school. Their plan makes sense to me, so, Crews, Vespa, and whomever, what is the cure to this? List what you would suggest? Other than to line up and gang up on a board meetings crying about how you don’t like the decision. What is the answer?? All this sounds to me like hatred for Edison, which the PFT has never liked, and loss of teacher’s jobs. I haven’t read anywhere where the school district plans to increase class size. Isn’t 28 students per class permitted by the State?
This one needs to go, how much money has the district paid him over the past few years:
Thom Simpson Strategic Planning 309-672-6752
thom.simpson@psd150.org
He is only one of many people they have brought back.
I agree the administration is not following the Expectations of Excellence:
— Respect—Integrity / Ethical Behavior
Collaboration — Communication — Commitment / Accountability
From http://www.championnews.net/district.php?did=909&year=2007
Thomas G Simpson for 2007: $97,194
BTW, mixing gangs causing problems? Too late for that, Peoria High has had nothing but problems with mixed gangs all year with kids relocated from the new Manual and even some from Woodruff. That’s old news. Just go to Peoria High when school lets out any afternoon, you’ll see what I am talking about. It’s like I said before, demographics which equals poor kids raised by kids who don’t give a damn.
I’m getting uncomfortable with where this is going. Let’s not start getting into personal attacks. Thom Simpson and other retirees who have gone back to work for the district aren’t doing anything wrong. The district offered them jobs and they took them. Wouldn’t you?
If we’re going to talk about administrative positions that need to be cut, let’s talk about the positions and not the people who hold them. If you think someone is ineffective in a position, that’s fine, but keep it to work-related, publicly-verifiable information (they are public employees, after all).
Basically, what I’m saying is, don’t libel anyone. Not that anyone has… yet. But I don’t want anyone going there. Thanks.
Arthur Perkins: $133,684
Now come on! She was retired! Hinton brought her back to help out. That’s alot of money to “help out”!
There are many more. Until admin. stops this madness no other dept. should cut staff.
C. J. I totally agree with you. This is not about the people that have gone back to work for the district. Its about the district bringing them back. My point is until the district needs to release these people. It is not personal its about money. The Champion website is open to the public, people should have a look so they understand how many people admin. has brought back. Why does the board allow it?
Oops my mind was going faster than my hands. My point is the admin. needs to release these people. No other dept. shoud experience cuts until these “helpers” and “consultants” are released.
Emtronics: My ideal plan (actually, Jeff and Hedy’s idea–maybe varying in some of these details) would be to convert one of the high schools into a bonafide alternative school–not a dumping grounds–but one where students would have to go if they were behind academically and/or were unable to exhibit enough self-discipline to conform to a regular classroom. A place where they would have to prove themselves truly ready to go to one of the other three high schools. A place, where they, nevertheless, would be expected to behave and put forth effort to succeed, etc., if they wanted to stay in school. In other words, an alternative school, which nevertheless had standards to be met, etc. Such a school, however, would cost money. I would say that it should also include middle school students.
Frankly, at the point, I would suggest Manual for several reasons.
The other three high schools could essentially become “choice” schools–students would more or less earn the right to go to these schools instead of the alternative school. Then I would applaud the district for trying new programs, etc., to update the present curriculum. Right now the district is offering the special John Hopkins program at Manual, hoping that the course will be so exciting that students will behave–IT ISN’T GOING TO HAPPEN. These programs cannot change student behavior–not the serious kinds of behavioral problems observed in many classrooms–a minority, yes, but a very, very distracting minority.
Ms Crews: sounds good, but isn’t there basically a school like that now? What is that school they just opened at the old SS building on Knoxville? Will teachers really volunteer to work these schools? I doubt it. I was out at Richwoods and was amazed to see a lot of teachers who used to be at Manual with one saying he was glad to be out of Manual. Doesn’t sound like teachers like some of their assignments. Makes me wonder if they did indeed open this school you envision, they wouldn’t have anybody to work it.
Let’s just think about the certified staffing issue for a minute. The first thing you have to determine is how many positions are being vacated because of resignations, retirements, leaves of absence for the ’09-’10 SY, where those positions are located and the certification requirements for each of those positions. Absent elimination of some of those positions, they will be available to be filled either by existing certified staff or new hires.
Looking at the proposed HS consolidation, there is a 9th grade academy proposed for the old Loucks building to house those students who were in the PHS & WHS attendance areas for the ’08-’09 SY. That building will require administrative staff, deans, counselors, clerical staff, nursing and custodial staff. The academy will also require sufficient teachers to teach a full schedule. The current HS staff at either WHS or PHS will have the opportunity to be considered for these positions.
The North St. campus will house grades 10, 11, and 12 from the current WHS and PHS attendance areas; in effect, doubling the current grades 10, 11, and 12 student population at PHS. These students will require teachers and there should be many employment opportunities for the PHS & WHS faculties.
It would be prudent for the district to honorably dismiss as many probationary teachers as possible. If there are any tenured HS faculty members who find themselves without a position either at the 9th Grade Academy or the North St. campus, they will have the opportunity for consideration for any of the available vacancies for which they are certified and qualified.
Looking at the Trewyn, Garfield, Harrison & Kingman transition to three, K-8 schools, there will still be the same number of students and they will still require a specific number of teachers. Taking naturally-occuring attrition and honorable dismissals into consideration, it seems there should be plenty of available positions for the current staff. The same analysis would hold true for the Irving, Kingman & Lincoln consolidation to one, K-8 school.
With the exception of the probationary teachers, and barring any further undisclosed cuts, the existing certified positions will be shuffled and rearranged. If the administration handles the restaffing correctly, there shouldn’t be any tenured teacher without a position.
C.J.–totally agree about not attacking individuals. I think we should question these consultant jobs more on the basis of what jobs they are actually performing. My contention is that some full-time employee (associate superintendent, etc.) should actually be qualified to do whatever these consultants are doing. I have a hard time imagining just what kind of consultant services they are providing–especially on a daily basis. The figure just listed for Arthur Perkins–that looks more like her administrative salary before she retired. Surely, she is not getting that as a consultant, right????
Also, I question the positions that seem to be created for people that someone in the district wants to hire. The job is created for the person instead of a necessary job being filled by a qualified person.
Prarier Celt: As far as I can figure it out, I think that is the way things will work out. No tenured teacher will be without a job–maybe a job they don’t want. For instance, since a significant of the teachers at Manual are non-tenured, tenured teachers from the district will probably be needed to replace them. My guess is that there are not any or very many current 150 high teachers voluteering to go. Even the “old” Manual teachers would not want to return–especially after the way they were treated in the hiring process for the “new” Manual, because they are now happy where they are, and because Manual is now in worse shape than it was when they left.
I will let people go to the Champion website and see for themselves. According to Champion these are last year’s salaries, 2007-2008 school year.