(Thank you to arroz for the valuable input)
School closings; always a traumatic issue, anywhere in the country. DCSS is facing its biggest budget gap ever, and school closings are rightfully on the table. Unfortunately, because of the weak leadership of the BOE, the South DeKalb vs. North DeKalb debate has again reared its ugly head. Our county commission (and Vernon Jones when CEO) also allowed all too often for many debates on budget to become more South DeKalb vs. North DeKalb nonsense.
Well, it's back.
What is incredibly aggravating is that members of the Citizens Planning Task Force, appointed by DCSS Board of Education members, have fanned the flames.
School closings are about cold hard data. That's it. It's not about "social justice". It's not about "breaking up a community". If the enrollment numbers just aren't there, we are no longer in the position to keep open a school because of politics.
One of the main reasons why schools like Sky Haven, Gresham Park, Kelley Lake, Toney, Meadowview, Midway and Peachcrest are being considered for closing is because they are in areas that have been decimated by the foreclosure crisis. If the students aren't there, they aren't there. Period. A school can be closed and rented out to a small business, and then re-opened later if the student population comes back.
Proposed school closures divide DeKalb
But listen to Citizens Planning Task Force members:
Task force member Bruce McMillian:
"I’m not going to let this panel be a scapegoat or whatever you want to call it for these tough decisions.
The pocket that has been targeted by the school system is an area that, I feel, is an area of least resistance. The affluent areas in the county, the ones with the higher tax base, none of those are being targeted.”
Task force member Darrell Jennings Sr.:
Said he plans to look at the enrollment of all 83 elementary schools before making any decision. The choice should be made based on how the closures will impact the community in terms of social justice, economic development and property values, he said.
“I just object to all these schools being closed in my backyard,” he said. “They gave us a list of 23 schools and 19 of those schools are in south DeKalb.”
Thank you Bruce McMillian and Darrell Jennings Sr. for miserably failing as task force members, and stooping to baseless allegations, instead of carefully and maturely focusing on the task at hand.
Luckily, we have some reason from Task Force member Tracie Scott:
“If we’re going to disrupt people’s communities, I think we need to be able to say this is going to be better for your child.”
Yes, there has to be a strong case made to the public to close any school, and the BOE and task force has to be very open with its reasoning. But...THIS IS NOT ABOUT GEOGRAPHY OR RACE, THIS IS NOT ABOUT SOUTH DEKALB VS. NORTH DEKALB. It's about an $88 million (or more) budget gap. As much as I advocate for massive cuts to the Central Office, MIS, instructional coaches, the school police department, contracting out services, selling surplus properties (if DCSS even has a list of all its properties), these cuts alone aren't going to get it done. The smallest schools need to be shuttered.
I am very, very curious to see if our Bord of Education members will be strong, or if they will cave into false emotion, especially Zepora Roberts, Gene Walker and Sarah Copelin-Wood. Let's hear your take on an issue that should be rational and objective, not emotional and subjective.
252 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 252 of 252Has pre-K been taken off the table? Just curious about the pre-K lotteries being held next week. I would rather see pre-K go and have smaller classes for older students.
Cutting the police force is also a great idea.
Did magnet school class size go up like the general ed class size this year?
I'm a student at Chamblee High School, and I just want to say that I'm pretty disgusted with the DeKalb county school system. In the last 3 1/2 years that I've gone to CHS, the only renovation money that I've seen go into CHS was for a small roof problem my freshman year. Other schools in the area that I've noticed are lacking in renovations are Lakeside and Dunwoody. But I know that schools like Tucker are consistently receiving money for things that may not be absolutely necessary. So my question is, why, just because our schools may perform better, do we receive less money? We feel just as neglected as the under-performing schools would, if not more because our school is so overpopulated (since everyone wants to come here). Reading the statistics, it's pretty obvious to me that DeKalb is trying to find obvious and easy ways to decide how to spend and save money, and not really looking at how it will effect the students.
Anon (regarding magnets/numbers)-
I'm doing my best to stay open-minded on all issues here, but it really seems as if you are not addressing the issues I have brought up.
I understand your child went to KMS and had a wonderful experience there - I don't doubt almost every child and family does - but please, don't just refer me to websites I have already cited in my posts and tell me to talk to the Magnet Department. My questions are not about magnets, they are about examining all the programs DCSS has for ROI.
DeKalb Parent, you're asking very valid questions, which I hope that we are able to find the answers to.
Fascinating budget comparisons regarding school system security. Really, I think it's time the board take a scalpel to this department. It's a bit out of control. I mean, are DeKalb kids that much worse than everywhere else - well, except those bad beasts in Dunwoody...
;-)
JK - Love ya DM!
Using information published at (http://www.dekalb.k12.ga.us/superintendent/budget/files/FY2010%20Approved%20Budget%20Book.pdfin) the DCSS FY2009-2010 Approved Budget to address some commonly held and frequently stated beliefs about gifted students and magnet schools:
1) Magnet programs are using 2 million dollars per year in busing.
-For ’09-10, DeKalb spent $46,059,438 on transportation (Budget pg. 12). I have been unable to find any breakdown of busing cost based on which students, program, or event is being used or attended even though posters say it’s “out there” and “I saw it somewhere.” Most of the plans presented to the BOE on Mar 5th include implementation of “Full Transportation Efficiency Plan” which would eliminate busing for magnet students and all other students classified as Out of Area transportation such as No Child Left Behind students.
Issue solved / complaint resolved – moving on.
2) Magnet schools are allotted “points” that are entirely locally funded.
-True, but non-magnet schools are also allotted points that are entirely locally funded.
Magnet ES – 31 local points
Non-magnet ES – 88 local points
Magnet MS -10 local points
Non-Magnet MS – 15 local points
Magnet HS – 51 local points
Non-Magnet HS – 105.3 local points
-Points are “spent” by the principal and are not always allocated for more teachers. So, points are not necessarily related to direct student instruction.
3) It’s not fair that magnet programs get so many more resources.
What resources? Be specific please. Local points are addressed above. That only leaves one other area of funding: Site-based General Operations funding. Please look at the county’s site-based expenditure allocation formula. There is NOT a “magnet” category. There is however a category for gifted. It’s important to note that magnet programs have a high concentration of intellectually gifted students. These students receive higher funding from the state. As for site-based expenditures (Supplies/materials, textbooks, travel, equipment, and media materials), the highest amounts go to Special Education (excluding gifted) and the second highest goes to Vocational Labs.
So, how much by grade level. . .
Grades 1-3 FTE = $85.82
Grades 4-5 FTE = $70.34
Grades 6-8 FTE = $68.06
Grades 9-12 FTE = $111.24
Gifted – all grade levels = $98.54
Ever hear of the Pentagon paying 500 dollars for a hammer? Same here – do you think that all money allocated to gifted students in a school actually goes to the gifted students – really?
Problems we are not addressing:
-Many DCSS publications show what percentage of county employees work at the Central Office – but none of the publications show what percentage of the overall budget those Central Office employees receive.
-The cost of athletics to the county is lumped together with food service. What do these two have in common that they should be lumped together? I think we deserve to know how much is actually spent on athletics by the school system. When we talk about programs which benefit only a few students, this category, not magnet, should move front and center! Are athletics considered untouchable?
- Why is Summer School offered for free? The taxpayer (the true customers which should be satisfied since they are paying the bills) paid for students to attend school and learn a subject once. Why twice? Most students who fail, do so because of lack of effort (the truth is harsh).
Finally, someone mentions the truly sacred cow -Athletics. I'd love one of you number crunchers to take on this issue. How much does DeKalb spend on middle school or high school athletics? How much do the football and basketball coaches make? Do they teach any courses other than gym and health (and I use the word "teach" loosely).
There has been so much time wasted on this blog bickering about cutting academic programs, but other than reducing junior varsity programs is athletics compeletely untouched? Why? I say eliminate most paid coaching positions and use volunteer community coaches.
Anon 11:09
Working backwards, in your concerns.
DCSS hardly offers summer school anymore. Only students in grades 3, 5 and 8 who fail the portion(s) of the CRCT that are required for promotion. So a child who missed content in second grade, gets no support the summer after and probably starts 3rd grade even further behind. DCSS used to offer summer school to any students that a teacher identified that needed help. This was cut out long ago.
There is summer school for ESL students that is paid for with federal money.
Credit recovery is free in DCSS schools. Under all state and federal accountability standards,
DCSS has to have students graduate or the penalties are very severe. I do think it would be fair to charge something. Parents would be more invested if they had skin in the game.
If a student wants to take summer school to get ahead or get a course out of the way, it is not free.
There is a significant amount of research showing that a longer school year benefits at-risk, low performing students. Since this will never be cost effective, summer school was the next best thing. I happen to think that the loss (again it was several years ago) of summer school for many was a huge loss.
On to athletics --
I would hope that in the 154 positions are some of the Athletic Department officials. No doubt that is one bloated department.
At many DCSS high schools, gate revenues for football cover not only the entire cost of their football team, but that of many of their other teams. Basketball as well is a high performing revenue sport at many high schools in DeKalb.
We have football and basketball teams that come no where near carrying their weight. Because DCSS is all about equity (when it is convenient) and fairness (again when it is convenient), nothing will change here.
There are about 18,000 student athletes in DCSS schools. There are about 28,000 high school students in DeKalb. Given that some kids do multiple sports, I would estimate that around 30 percent of all high school students are participating in a sport.
There was a suggesting on one of the Board's plans to charge each student athlete $10. I don't know if it is still out there. I think the fee could be a bit higher, but across the country the ACLU has been filing lawsuits/injunctions to stop school systems from charging much larger fees. (A small fee of 10 or 20 probably wouldn't be worth their effort.)
Across DeKalb County, sports booster clubs are raising thousands (tens of thousands) of dollars to make sure that their teams can have what they need to be competitive. This ranges from simple things like meals before a game to much more complex things like concussion reducing helmets. So while sometimes it might look like there is all this money for this sport or that sport, very often it is coming from the parents and the community.
Many DCSS publications show what percentage of county employees work at the Central Office – but none of the publications show what percentage of the overall budget those Central Office employees receive.
Figure out what you want to know and file an open records request. Momfirst did.
This blog has had huge discussions on security costs, an area that, at least compared to other school systems, looks like it might need some trimming. But unless the Board really hears from parents, this doesn't seem likely. (Though again, we don't know what is proposed in that 154 cuts.)
Magnet schools use to get extra per pupil money. They no longer do, but many still retain the materials and equipment that was purchased with those funds.
When we talk about resources, we really mean teacher resources, not pencils and paper.
First and foremost, the latest budget proposal cuts small school points significantly. These points are most likely found in the elementary school locally funded points, otherwise known as Points Advanced for Programs.
At the elementary level, there are approximately 1110 magnet students that share 31 locally funded points. This computes to one extra point per 40 students. For the approximately 46,000 non-magnet elementary students (excluding pre-k), the 88 local points result in one extra point for every 520 students.
At middle school, the ratio is the following:
One extra point for every 80 students in the magnet program.
One extra point for every 1,367 students not in the magnet program.
At high school, the results of my fun math project are as following:
One extra point for every 30 students in the magnet program.
One extra point for every 271 students.
Almost every high school in DeKalb is receiving 4-6 Points Advanced for Programs. This allows high schools to make sure they have a comprehensive program.
So, what exactly have you proven. Oh yes, spending on extra teacher resources (I am going to address you concerns about how these points are used in the next post.) is at least 10 times higher for magnet students than non-magnet students.
When Dr. Halford (and maybe before, I don't go back that far) was in charge and before Roy Barnes changed how money was to flow to the school, DCSS used some loose funding formula that many principals abused to build up their school administrations. It wasn't unheard of to have an elementary school with 600 students and 2 assistant principals but yet have uncertified teachers all over the place.
Johnny Brown came in and cleaned out the uncertified teachers. I don't recall the exact number, but it was huge. Like startling huge. He also removed some administrators from those small schools.
A few years ago, DCSS embarked on an experiment/pilot program to see if you could improve academic outcomes by increasing the number of administrators within in a middle and high school. (Mostly from a school climate perspective.) Towers was one of the schools I believe, but I think that program was eliminated in the last whittling of the budget.
System administrators have indicated that there are unearned assistant principals and school counselors. I am thinking this number is around 10 of each because that is what is listed on the latest budget scenarios as savings to be realized by attrition/elimination.
Keep in mind, that all our small schools are problematic in terms of state funding for administrators. DCSS has assistant principals in all elementary schools, many systems in GA don't use APs in small schools. City of Decatur is an example of this, though they have an Instructional Coach in each school.
There are also a few schools, those that have not met AYP persistently that may have larger administrative staffs. I believe that this has been funded through the Targeted Assistance Points, which are slated for elimination.
The Mommy, I do want to see what the people in the central office athletic department and the high school athletic coaches make in DeKalb. If folks can post the salaries of the Fernbank staff, surely they can post the salaries of the coaching staff. I think these salaries will be very, very high. And in a budget crisis, this taxpayer would much rather pay for a science or math teacher, or a magnet program for high achieving students, than a footmall or basketball coach any day (unless they are teaching calculus or physics).
In flush times, I'm all for sports in public schools but we are in a crisis.
And there are many, many DeKalb schools where few show up for games and these schools do not have well funded booster clubs.
Actually, DCSS doesn't employ full time coaches. All are teachers or community members and I believe the stipend is in the range of $1000-$1500, though I am not sure.
In Texas, for example, the head football coach is a full time employee whose only duty is coaching.
Each high school gets a certain number of these stipends to use. I am not sure of the exact number, but it is far fewer than say Gwinnett (which of course has much bigger high schools).
You are right about the fact that we have some high schools that can't even muster enough support to form a booster club. Those programs really suffer because of this.
I don't have time right now to look up the salaries of the athletic department. I will try and do that later. (or someone else can).
I am disappointed that DCSS hasn't used this budget crisis as an opportunity to look at how to do things differently across the board. However, apparently many school systems across the country are missing this same opportunity.
Only places like Kansas City, where bankruptcy and state takeover were imminent, are school system administrators and BOEs being forced to really reinvent.
In the interest of clear thinking - essential for credibility - we need to keep aware that there are a lot of different magnet programs in DCSS, and we need to avoid lumping all of them together.
There are the high achievers, and performing arts programs we keep specifically discussing, but there are also magnets that are mostly math science and technology (at least judging by their names), and one that is world languages as well.
Then there are the health medical sciences magnet programs slated for three of the high schools next school year, and the environmental, energy and engineering magnet at Arabia Mountain. I would also add the STT program at Fernbank Science Center, because it requires an application and recommendation and not all students who apply are able to attend - only 180 9th gaders a year can go.
I know that the high achievers programs get extra staffing and extra programs (e.g. world language either daily or every other day). STT gets exposure to advanced scientific tools and extra field trips as well as a teacher who is a specialist in the field.
I do not know what the other magnet programs get - anybody else know for sure? We need to be discussing on the basis of real facts.
Removing a program that is already cost-neutral is pointless. How much do the four programs the BOE is taking away cost?
(BTW, not all the kids in the high achievers programs are gifted - the schools test them when they get there (with more than one different test, if necessary) and get them labeled gifted. If a child is at the 75%ile on standardized tests, that means 25% of the kids who took it scored higher - if we are doing high achievers, why not make the criterion 90%ile? Both the school buildings that currently house the programs are under capacity - raise the admissions criteria and expand the program - there might not even be a need for a lottery?
Just sayin...
Addressing “The Mommy”
Yes summer school is beneficial – so are many academic programs that are on the chopping block. I’m glad you agree that it would be fair to charge something.
You mentioned the ACLU in regard to student fees. The ACLU threatened to file a complaint in Rhode Island over fees charged to students for athletics, but that complaint was (or would be if it was filed) based on Rhode Island state law. Whether or not we can charge fees in GA is a different matter. I do know that we currently charge fees for many EXTRA-curricular activities with no legal issues raised. And yes, athletics are extra-curricular.
You said “Magnet schools use to get extra per pupil money. They no longer do, but many still retain the materials and equipment that was purchased with those funds. When we talk about resources, we really mean teacher resources, not pencils and paper.”
Every time someone addresses whatever magnet complaint is presented – the complainer shifts the complaint. Now, the complaint is that they “used” to get more? What resources do you think the teachers have? More computers – no. More books – no. Better desks – no. Better on-going training – no.
The point to student ratio – you are right, fun math. Lots of work. You ask, what did I “prove?” Simple, that magnet programs are not the only beneficiaries of locally funded points – this was in response to many posters, from many articles. Is the ratio of locally funded points higher for magnet students – yes. But you are wrong when you say the points are spent on resources. Points go to employee positions, not paper and books. You said you would address this in your next post – but you did not.
I will keep reading the posts on this board, but I'm done with addressing magnet inequities which seem to be based on some past issues that are no longer the case.
Like you, I'm about to go enjoy the day and the rest of the weekend.
You are using resources as in paper and pencils, I am referring to resources as Human resources.
I happen to think extra teachers are a huge resource and if you choose to ignore the huge benefits that are afforded to students in the magnet programs because they have these extra HUMAN RESOURCES then what can I do.
When I said extra teacher resources, I meant extra teachers for the students, not extra resources for the teachers. The most important resource for a student is teachers.
I suspect that you and I will never see eye to eye on this. As has been said on this blog repeatedly, magnets are operated at little to no additional expense across the country. We need to ask why this isn't the case in DeKalb.
I am not suggesting in any way, shape or form that we end the magnet programs. All I am saying is that those schools/programs should operate at much less expense.
Nice job everyone. I would wage a guess that you have dug up details that even the board may not be aware of. Make sure you are emailing what you find to each of them.
One over-arching concern I have had all along is that when we suggest cutbacks that include things like selling off property or cutting MIS or central office, we are met with "that won't save that much". But consolidating schools will only save a half million per school, and although increasing class size will eliminate teaching positions (saving big bucks right now), in the long term a move like that could prove quite harmful to students.
Right now, we are spending well over a half-million in salaries alone for Lewis and Pope - who are sidelined, due to the fact that they are both being investigated by the DA. That's a cost that sticks in my craw big time. Why didn't Lewis fire Pope a long time ago? How can we trust leadership who think these kinds of outrageous expenditures are acceptable. You'll notice, the board hasn't fired Pope either. Something's up with that, but I digress.
Every little half million adds up. Selling property would streamline the system, generate some revenue and maybe even encourage some development. (Heritage school would be a great park for the neighborhood - and the people want that - but the board is standing in the way.)
Eliminating costs in each and every department before heading to the classroom is a good idea. It seems that there is bloat everywhere. And, along the way, aren't we creating a streamlined system that will more efficiently serve the children? I would like that to be Job 1.
Re extracurricular fees, in DeKalb, right now, Pay to Play is not allowed. Many teams etc charge dues, but if a player doesn't pay or a band member doesn't pay, the coach/sponsor isn't allowed to punish the player/participant. However, I suspect that some of the coaches/sponsors aren't shy about collecting dues.
I suspect board policy would have to be changed (or ignored) but I think that charging fees is fine for extracurricular activities.
I even know that some have suggested charging for transportation, but GA Law seems to prohibit that.
(After this, I am done.)
DeKalb parent, the magnet programs that are on the chopping block have 20 points between them, per the DCSS budget proposal. For Evansdale, this "pays" for a world language teacher, not sure how the other points are used.
The extra points for Montessori are used for paras that are not funded by the state. When Montessori started, I believe that the state allowed (and paid) for paras in grades K-3. Now the state only reimburses for paras in grades K. Montessori has some extra money budgeted for training and materials as well.
There is also a Montessori specialist in the central office, and as of last year's school choice brochure, the magnet and theme office had a director, a coordinator and 2 administrative assistants. No idea if this is the same this year.
Let's clear the air on this - just know - people won't pay for anything. Don't even put that on the radar. Heck, at Lakeside, people won't pay the $5 to the PTA for dues and a daytimer that students have to use. So, (and certainly these parents know this) the PTA has to pay for the daytimers anyway. The sense of entitlement is deep.
Cere
I am really done.
But those are great points. I think that some of the property DCSS owns is unsellable, but I do think DCSS ought to be working with DeKalb County Gov't about potential green space usage.
I think Lewis didn't fire Pope, because he never fires anyone. I also think she is (was to be) the star witness at the Heery Mitchell lawsuit and that played into the decision.
At least with Lewis, we didn't add expenses by temporarily replacing him. If he does go, he will have to be replaced and so that isn't really money we could save.
There has been much energy spent on picking at programs, not just by bloggers but by the BOE.
I don't think this gets to the issue or solves the problem.
As a veteran of both government and private industry "right sizing" efforts, the entire system needs to look at how it delivers services- including MIS, Special Education, ELL, Magnet, Athletics, Instruction, Title I, Fernbank, Transportation, etc.
DCSS probably needs to cut $100 million and everyone must shoulder some of this burden. Salaries and benefits are high at the administration and superivsory levels. I think there should be an across the board pay cut of 1.5% and an additional cut of 1.5% for any employee making over $100,000.
Then the management of every department needs to find and eliminate 10% of their OWN budget. The managers know where the fat and waste is. This would include 10% of central office.
DCSS needs to consolidate many underutilized elementary schools and as many of these tiny special programs like Night School and Truancy school. These might not make big dents this year, but the system needs to do it for the future. The current budget crisis offers a compelling reason.
We need a .5 or 1.0 % increase in the millage rate but given the fact so many of our residents are teetering on the brink of foreclosure and are unemployed, I think the tax increase should wait until next year.
I don't know about you all, but I had a tax increase of $350.68 from 2008 to 2009.
In fact, this is true for my entire neighborhood. I get a sinking feeling that we are already being asked to carry the burden for areas hit by decline and foreclosure. There was certainly no reason for an increase last year, but there it was.
One thing the school system need to be aware of - people can sue them for over collection of taxes, or even for creating a decline in property values due to low performing schools or allowing schools to create blight in areas by not keeping up the facilities.
Just about EVERY large district is 100 million dolllars short, right.
AFTER reducing un-needed personel (Dekalb-TV, Executive directors, Assistant Dog Catcher...etc.. for example)and adjusting salaries of the WELL-CONNECTED BUT DO NOTHINGS,
let's cut the school year length to match the budget shortage!
Seriously, we need to keep trying to get something for NOTHING!
Fulton is apparently letting 1000 people go. That's 1000 people about to file for unemployment and the metro area is already at 10.8% unemployed.
I would like to see the system attempt everything possible before sending more people into unemployment. Sell properties. Close costly departments that only employ a few people. Cut back on take the take home fleet (it's enormous!) Consolidate schools and centers. Cut the health and wellness. Cut everyone's pay across the board a bit. Cut non-teaching staff making over the top teacher pay rate ($70,000?) double. And raising property taxes may also have to occur - but that is definitely not going to solve the problem - it's just one more line item.
@ DeKalbparent 6:33 pm
Pertaining to magnet class sizes, you missed my point which is my fault because I obviously didn't explain it very well.
Magnet/theme program sizes are set by DeKalb County which is under Pat Copeland. The class sizes in magnet/theme programs have absolutely nothing to do with gifted state regulations.
At Kittredge, DCSS uses a gifted model that allows them to get extra money from the state because all the teaches are certified as gifted.
When a school goes away from the Gifted Services Resource Model which sets the class size at 17 for elementary, they can pretty well put as many students in a class as they want - hence your daughter was in a class of 30+ students.
DCSS sets the small class sizes at magnets, and DCSS can change them any time they want.
As far as ROI - I believe every "program" in DeKalb - magnet, theme, Fernbank Science Center, America's Choice, Springboard, Instructional Coaches, etc. must be looked at for ROI.
But FIRST in line has to be the 8,800 admin and support personnel versus the 7,000 teachers in DCSS.
The BOE should insist Ms. Tyson cut admin and support a minimum of 10% whether by layoffs, outsourcing, attrition, and any other means before she touches classroom teachers. At the same time, she needs to look at special programs to see if they are giving us the returns they promised and we want.
Classroom teachers seem to be the only area the BOE and Ms. Tyson are willing to let go through attrition.
The DCSS BOE is at a point where retaining canine dogs numbers are more important than keeping retaining teacher numbers.
If Ms. Tyson was an educator she would have know that all educational studies show that smaller class size is the most effective and consistent way of raising student achievement.
I spent 40 years in education. I know that if Ms. Tyson continues along the path of increasing admin and support and decreasing teachers, DeKalb will be the worst system in metro Atlanta - oops! I forgot we already have the least percentage of schools that make AYP in metro Atlanta so we are the worst system in the metro area.
Dr. Lewis's idea of raising the admin and support from 64,92 to 8,828 and decreasing teachers from 7,350 to 7,031 didn't work out so well after all for our students.
But you "ain't seen nothin' yet" once the BOE and Ms. Tyson get through eliminating classroom positions this coming year. You think its bad for your kids now. It's going to get so much worse, and I don't think parents can do anything about it. Ms. Tyson and her vast army of support and admin personnel will never turn over the figures to parents - the figures you are seeking.
You can do some very good general calculations using the state Salary and Travel audit and the DCSS website information, but you cannot see "behind the curtain" as Cere so aptly put it.
You are threatening 56% of the DCSS jobs machine. They will make it as difficult as possible.
What is the "R" in "ROI" in a public school setting? Test scores? College admission? Jail avoidance?
School systems across the country charge a fee for athletics. Should be at least $25 or $50 per student per sport, more for the very expensive sports like football.
Great points below by Anon 11:09 PM, summer school and athletics can longer be sacred cows!!!
-The cost of athletics to the county is lumped together with food service. What do these two have in common that they should be lumped together?
- Why is Summer School offered for free? The taxpayer (the true customers which should be satisfied since they are paying the bills) paid for students to attend school and learn a subject once. Why twice?
March 12, 2010 11:09 PM
We need the BOE to list the salaries of all coaches. Some sports the stipend is low (track), and some it's very, very high (football, basketball), we have a number of coaches who are paid as full-time teachers but they only teach a few classes and are in fact de facto full-time head football and basketball coaches. But it's much worse in Gwinnett and South Georgia than it is here.
If Ms. Tyson was an educator she would have know that all educational studies show that smaller class size is the most effective and consistent way of raising student achievement.
Actually, the research shows that teacher quality trumps class size. Certainly, any teacher can provide more individual attention with a smaller class than a larger one, but I would far rather have my student in a large class with an excellent teacher than in a small class with a poor teacher. Some teachers don't manage to provide any individualized instruction no matter how small the class. Others seem to manage even when they have high student loads. The most effective way to improve student performance is to hire and retain the best teachers and either retrain or fire poor teachers.
Imagine a school district with 100,000 students and a student teacher ration of 1:25. You have 4000 teachers. Reduce your student teacher ration to 1:20 and you have to hire 1000 more teachers. Do you think there are 1000 excellent teachers sitting around waiting for you to hire them or are you perhaps forced to hire the teachers that are available because no one else wanted to hire them?
"Do you think there are 1000 excellent teachers sitting around waiting for you to hire them or are you perhaps forced to hire the teachers that are available because no one else wanted to hire them?"
There are 1000 excellent teachers in the metro area, and many students graduating with masters degrees (and B.A.'s) in May. Teachers like me will leave their current school district to work in a system that focuses on the student and provides teachers with an environment that fosters learning, not bureaucracy and mindless paperwork and unncessary meetings.ionsma
My child plays golf at Lakeside, the transportation for the sport has been cut. No bus drives them to practice and matches the parents drive and some are old enough to drive themselves. So why hasn't transportation been cut for other sports teams? Soccer & baseball are provided a bus to their events.
@ Anonymous 2:21 pm
"Actually, the research shows that teacher quality trumps class size. Certainly, any teacher can provide more individual attention with a smaller class than a larger one, but I would far rather have my student in a large class with an excellent teacher than in a small class with a poor teacher. "
How do you propose to attract new college graduates who are experts in their field to become teachers?
You don't overwhelm them with huge class sizes, excessive paperwork, scant supplies, and environments that are full of mold, dust and inadequate heat and air and then expect to attract the best and the brightest to your child's classroom.
We'll keep excellent teachers near retirement, and we'll even keep some due to the economy, but unless there are some drastic changes to rebalance the teaching staff to non-teaching staff, DCSS will find it harder and harder to get those excellent teachers DeKalb parents want for their children.
Anon @ 11:17 said,
**As a veteran of both government and private industry "right sizing" efforts, the entire system needs to look at how it delivers services- including MIS, Special Education, ELL, Magnet, Athletics, Instruction, Title I, Fernbank, Transportation, etc. **
Title 1 is an area most citizens need to research and get a better understanding of. Mu understanding is these are Federal, earmarked, targeted dollars and are not a part of the general budget. These dollars must be used as prescribed by the Feds. There are many positions in DeKalb that are funded by these dollars, including Instructional Coaches. One cannot take monies that are for a specific Title 1 school and use them elsewhere in the district, unless they plan to break the law.
The budget for FY2010 was approximately $851 million. DeKalb will need to reduce this by slightly over $100 million dollars for FT2011. Budget cuts will impact the general budget NOT Title 1.
Anon, I posted about across the board reductions and I know a fair amount about Title I. I did not suggest that Title I monies could be used for non Title I purposes. What I said (or meant) is that DeKalb county needs to re-examine how they deliver Title I services and use Title I money. DeKalb signed a huge contract with America's Choice but the teachers in the trenches tell us this is garbage. I have long loathed "scripted teaching." When a school system buys scripted teaching programs from private companies it tells me that the administration does not believe that its own teaching staff are competent.
The answer is to eliminate the poor teachers and not to punish the good teachers and stifle creativity.
The big problem for DeKalb and other large school districts is that one size never fits all in education. The school system is too big but I understand it would take legislation to break up big districts like DeKalb and Fulton.
I emailed all the board reps with my concern that there seemed to be things that were "off the table" in considering reductions. My rep, Don McChesney, emailed me back with this:
I am a member of that committee and nothing has been taken off the table.
He also replied to an earlier email where I requested Ms. Tyson and the BOE to look hard everywhere before raising class sizes much:
You can count on class sizes being increased. I am sure you have read the
impact on the loss of tax dollars across the state. This is not unique to
DeKalb. It is sweeping the state and the nation. Remember the state came
to us last year and suggested we raise our class sizes. It is going to be
done. There is no way to meet the budget crises unless we do. Two students
per class has an impact of $14 million savings in DeKalb. It is not how we
want to do it, but we are in a Draconian situtation. Change is coming and
everyone is going to have to deal with it. I have been working with this
budget for two months. To balance this budget is a massive job. It also is
closer to $ 100-$115 million now. By the time the legislature leaves I
have no idea where we will be. The projected deficit for next year just
from the state is $2.1 BILLION. That alone will equate to probably at
least $30-$40 million in DeKalb and this is without the tax information
from DeKalb for a year from now. I hope you can appreciate the depth of
this financial disaster.
Very few teachers coming out of college could be titled experts in their field. It takes at least 3 years for a new teacher to have experience. Good teachers also receive quality training and keep abreast of the latest findings in the field of education. DeKalb doesn't provide good training for teachers and few teachers that I have met keep up with the latest research findings. Probably, because it's hard to use anyway, because you have to do it the "DeKalb way." I.E. Scripted lessons, or a syllabus that makes little common sense.
Good teachers are fed up with the direction that DeKalb is taking, because they realize the children are getting short changed. They may not leave now, but they will leave it's just a matter of time. Teachers close to retirement will leave too, as their salaries go down and aren't helping with their retirement and money isn't contributed to the annuity.
I find the answer from the school board member ridiculous, but at least you received an answer. County residents are very concerned about the schools and how they are and will affect property value and possibly increase the foreclosure rate with tax increases and poor schools.
It does not seem that the board knows how to make a budget or how to pick and choose what is and is not important. I wish that they'd talk to teachers and county residents about what they see as important. Everything should be on the table. Every child in DeKalb deserves to have a quality education. Yes, one size does not fit all, but it seems like we have haves and have nots when it comes to receiving a quality education. The children are our future and not a way to make jobs for people.
Most of the children deserve more than what they are getting and it really saddens me as a teacher and DeKalb resident.
Title I funds could provide reading and math instruction for children who are struggling in those areas, it does not have to be used for programs. Title I funds, could be used for training teachers to better understand reading and better delivery or even discipline techniques if that is a problem at the school. Title I funding does not have to go to scripted programs that are not proving to be beneficial to the children.
It appears to me that the board's mind is already made up and DeKalb will pay dearly for this decision for years to come. Even if new school board members are elected this school year, the mess that will be created from cutting education while keeping unnecessary people employed will be hard to fix in a year or two. It will take many years to fix the mess, the board will do, if they do not take a serious look at the budget and treat all children the same and by the same, I mean provide all children with the same class size, and a quality education that has people wanting to come to DeKalb.
Has anyone asked their BOE member how they can justify 8,800 admin and support personnel when we only have 7,000 teachers?
I didn't read in the minutes where those numbers were discussed. The only positions I read that we discussing eliminating were teacher positions. Won't this make DCSS have an even smaller percent of our personnel as teachers?
I don't agree with other posters that larger class sizes are a necessity, but as long as the BOE continues to employ vast numbers of admin and support personnel they will be inevitable.
I agree with the Anonymous that said this BOE is causing irrevocable harm to our schools.
Please save all of your emails from BOE members. Next fall we may need them when we try to unseat as many as possible.
Title 1 funds do not have to be used for Instructional Coaches or America's Choice or Springboard or HSTW or any other yearly multimillion program.
Title 1 can be used for anything Ms. Tyson wants. The only federal stipulations are that:
1. Title 1 funds must be used only in Title 1 schools
2. Title 1 funds cannot be used in Title 1 schools to subsidize programs that are schoolwide. For example, I can't supply Springboard schoolwide, but use Title 1 funds to pay for it in Title 1 schools and the general fund to pay for it in non-Title 1 schools. Any program must be "something over and above" what students in the non-Title 1 schools get.
In the 80s and 90s DCSS used Title 1 funds to fund Title 1 math teachers in every single Title 1 elementary school. These Title 1 math teachers were not coaches. They were teachers who taught small groups of struggling math students. This also helped lower the class sizes of the regular classroom teacher's math classes, but primarily it gave the struggling math student the opportunity for individualized instruction.
Ms. Tyson could decide to let more Title 1 funds expenditures be decided in the Title 1 schools. Dr. Lewis made the decision to buy America's Choice and fund the Instructional Coaches via Title 1 funds (although I'm sure Title 1 doesn't pay the benefits cost of the Instructional Coaches - that's $1,542,490 out of the general fund - our local tax dollars).
Title 1 under Dr. Lewis became a Central Office piggy bank to fund whatever program looked good with absolutely no accountability for student achievement.
DCSS received $34,000,000 in Title 1 funds 2007-2008, the last year the state has the figures on their website. The amount must be considerably higher now.
Central office athletic department salaries: 636,000ish dollars!
Only 4 of the ten have the word athletics in their titles. Only 9 of the 10 have athletics listed as their department on Community Net, so I removed the one I check them all (hoping that most were shared with other departments, only to be mostly disappointed.) One is listed as the adaptive PE/sports specialist so I think he most certainly works across departments.
One of the most helpful things on this blog is when we can compare DCSS to other systems. For the metro area systems that list an athletic director, our director's salary was within the 10 percent range either way.
However, this was just the beginning of things smelling funny in the public school athletic world. Fulton County lists no administrative staff for athletics at all on the GA audits website. So, I went to their website and found that they do have a few people assigned to athletics, they just don't call them that.
Cobb and Gwinnett only report their athletic directors' salaries, no other coordinators, though we know that Gwinnett spends big on these things. However, when you go to the GCSS website, the pages about athletics (once you can find them) don't mention anything about central office personnel.
In Gwinnett each high school has an athletic director. This athletic director is listed as and paid like an assistant principal. When you click on administration, the list of APs includes this person and the only responsibility listed for them is Athletic Director.
So, their spending clearly knocks our spending, which isn't really a surprise.
Without a doubt, athletics in Cobb,Fulton and Gwinnett (duh!) bring in more revenue that DCSS. Probably a lot more, as each school has its own stadium and many booster clubs have a financial interest in the overall success of their programs. (Revenue stays at home.)
One interesting question might be how much are we subsidizing athletics in DeKalb?
I also believe that the system should charge a fee, though as Cere says I think it will be difficult to collect from many parents. If they collected, $50 total per athlete a year (not even per sport), that would be approximately 900,000 which would cover a lot of costs of the programs. Even if you only collected from half the kids, you would have $450,000.
The Mommy said “One of the most helpful things on this blog is when we can compare DCSS to other systems.”
She is correct. I think we should take this a step further and not just compare DCSS to other metro school districts (which is all that has appeared on this site so far), but also begin to compare ratios from smaller school systems and even private school systems – if we can gain access to their data.
The bottom line is this, we at DCSS are TOP HEAVY (as are other counties). We all know it. There is NO justification for it.
This is not unusual for a government provided service - to see the levels of bureaucracy grow while the level and quality of service dwindle. We see it, we know it’s wrong, and yet we join in the argument how much of a pay cut the actual service providers (the teachers) should take, as though it were the only option. Let’s cut teacher pay by 1.5, or 5, or 6.25%. Or we’ll buy into the argument that “everyone needs skin in the game” and cut everyone’s pay . . . and that seems fair, doesn’t it? This is a great example of faulty logic by use of the either/or premise. We can cut teacher’s pay by this percent . . . or that percent. Then if it’s not the higher percentage, everyone is happy because it could have been more and the teachers should be quiet and be thankful they have a job.
In reality, there is another option – not either/or, but not at all. We do NOT need to cut teacher pay because we do NOT need all the non-teachers that are currently employed within the county. Fulton is right to cut jobs, they are just WRONG in which jobs they are cutting. The parents know it, the students know it.
This should not be an argument over Title I, athletics, magnet, or busing. It should be a process of discovering just how many county level positions can be cut. Not reduced, but cut. A supervisor may have 15 tasks, but that does not justify having 15 sub-supervisors, one for each task.
When it comes down to it, it may be time to bypass the BOE and go to the state level for a long-term solution. The state legislature can impose spending guidelines (as they already do in the QBE), to control the percentage of funding that can be applied to non-teaching positions within the county. School systems are made to educate, teachers teach, ALL other positions are support and therefore secondary.
Some counties simply can't help themselves.
As a parent of a school that was closed so Sembler could buy the old Kittredge property, a deal that never happened, the excuse given to us was that we had to be equal. If we close a school in South DeKalb we had to close a school in north DeKalb. Sorry to say the other schools that took those students are now bursting at the seams, one has 4 trailers now (Huntley Hills) the other Montgomery is on the verge of trailers. Please stop with the racist comments. We didn't like our school closing but we're doing well at our new school. But with growth in our area still happening, even in this current economy, I worry that the board closed the wrong schools back then. Please redraw the lines to balance attendance at all schools. No racism or anything else just get the right data and make the right decisions. Another way to save money is to fire Pat Pope instead of having her take her extended paid vacation. Plus, fire Crawford so a real administrator, and not a former PE teacher can make the tough decisions for our school system. Also, drop the ridiculous "premier" moniker. Time to reduce Central office staff cut it in half!
Re: Anonymous @ 11:32pm
"Title 1 under Dr. Lewis became a Central Office piggy bank to fund whatever program looked good with absolutely no accountability for student achievement."
Might this decision of CL's be due to the fact that the head of Title I for the district is his "mentee"? Whatever Title I demands, Title I gets. No questions asked. If anyone dares to question Title I expenditures, CL summarily punishes them. There is a definite pattern of behavior there. No matter the department, anyone who crosses Audria Berry feels the pain.
Hopefully Tyson will have a backbone and will not feel the pressure to allow Title I to run the district's major decisions.
Maureen Downey has a strand on her AJC blog "Get Schooled" entitled "Metro systems “bloated, inefficient and unfocused.”
Maureen says, "I have long felt that DeKalb and Cobb schools are like the Atlanta schools and government in that one of their primary purposes is to be a jobs program."
Here is a great post I'm going to repost from someone named "Hard Working Classroom Teacher", a Clayton County teacher. Remember Clayton the system SACS forced to elect a COMPLETELY new BOE and consequently got a new superintendent. BTW Clayton now surpasses DeKalb in percentage of students who made AYP - less wealthy than DCSS and spends less per pupil.
"The Superintendent of Clayton County has been recently hired and recruited from California. He appears to be highly effective as reflected in his observations of our system. The majority of the budget cuts are not affecting the classroom teachers. Central office is recommended to be completely reorganized. He is right on target. There are currently administrators in the central office with salaries above $150,000 per year! Totally overpaid- especially in light of the fact that many the central office positions are nonessential.
I have observed the many of the metro systems have too many central office administrators. As a classroom teacher, I realize that the positions have minimal if any impact on my daily classroom instruction. I plan my lessons, teach my lessons, confer with parents, grade papers, post grades and continually work at creating an optimal learning environment. Does the central office administrators help in this? No……. I do occasionally see some persons from the central office walking around our school giving their input on watching 10 minutes of a lesson. Great for my progress, right? :)
Other positions that are totally nonessential are EIP teachers and Coaches for Reading and Math. They need to be in the classroom. Our school has over 10 EIP teachers and two coaches walking around serving like paraprofessionals by working in small groups with students. In other states that I have taught or interned, this was the job of a paraprofessional. Often one can observe these teachers in their offices or rooms just passing time – you see they do not have a continual daily schedule like the classroom teachers. They have alot of downtime to chat with others, talk on the phone, make runs to stores or restaurants,…..Meanwhile the classroom teachers are with the students all day long. The resource teachers do no lesson planning, grading, conferencing, and do not have their names attached to student test scores.
Gifted teachers can also be classroom teachers. The students can be placed with teachers who have that endorsement. The inclusion model is more effective in regards to instruction and costs. Having a Gifted endorsed teacher is a complete waste of money if that teacher does nothing but pull students out of the classroom.
Most of the metro systems need to reevaluate the essential needs of the school and completely reorganize the staffing structure. There is too much waste of salaries on nonessential central office and school based positions."
Went to Ga DOE site to get to get AYP figures as far back as I could. Earliest was 2004-05, most current 2007-08. Did the math. For discussion purposes, this is what DCSS is getting for its Title I bucks.
Total Title I budgeted funds:
04-05 -
05-06 up 10.2%
06-07 down 1.6%
07-08 up 8.8%
Percent of Title I schools making AYP:
04-05 71%
05-06 65.5%
06-07 76.5%
07-08 62%
Percent of Title I schools not making AYP:
04-05 28%
05-06 34.5%
06-07 23.5%
07-08 38%
Percent of Title I schools with Distinguished Improvement:
04-05 61.7%
05-06 52.4%
06-07 51.8%
07-08 38%
Percent of Title I schools with Commended (ADQ) Improvement:
04-05 8.6%
05-06 9.5%
06-07 15.3%
07-08 18.5%
Percent of Title I schools with Adequate Did Not Meet AYP status:
04-05 14.8%
05-06 15.5%
06-07 5.9%
07-08 20.7%
Percent of Title I schools with Needs Improvement - AYP status:
04-05 2.5%
05-06 3.6%
06-07 9.4%
07-08 5.4%
Percent of Title I schools with Needs Improvement status:
04-05 12.8%
05-06 19%
06-07 17.6%
07-08 17.4%
Percent of Title I schools in NI for 1 year:
04-05 3.7%
05-06 11.9%
06-07 11.8%
07-08 9.8%
Percent of Title I schools in NI for 2 years:
04-05 7.4%
05-06 2.4%
06-07 7.1%
07-08 3.3%
Percent of Title I schools in NI for 3 years:
04-05 1.2%
05-06 6%
06-07 4.7%
07-08 5.4%
Percent of Title I schools in NI for 4 years:
04-05 0%
05-06 0%
06-07 2.4%
07-08 2.2%
Percent of Title I schools in NI for 5 or more years:
04-05 2.5%
05-06 2.4%
06-07 1.2%
07-08 2.2%
Absent over 15 days:
04-05 12.3%
05-06 13.3%
06-07 13.7%
07-08 12.3%
Graduation rate:
04-05 52.6%
05-06 57.4%
06-07 67.4%
07-08 73%
I Graduation
From Anon 11:16 AM"
"A supervisor may have 15 tasks, but that does not justify having 15sub-supervisors, one for each task."
Truer words have never been written. But alas, this is the DCSS/Crawford Lewis/Ramona Tyson way. Especially with MIS. A highly paid administrator for every single and specific task (with many having their own admin asst.). And this BOE is unwilling to change the paradigm.
We can afford 10 days of the 180 contact days.... Why make our kids and teachers suffer 180 bad days. Let's have the best 170 day year education.
The State of Georgia is broke.
It can't afford to pay for 180 school days. It is 10 day short of money. Why not reduce school by about 10 days?
@ Anonymous 9:31 pm
Great comparison. A lot of work.
Seems odd that DCSS standardized test scores haven't improved, but the graduation rate has. How could that possibly happen?
Students haven't shown improvement on standardized test scores in DCSS Title 1 schools for the last 4 years.
What have DCSS students in Title 1 schools gotten in the way of student achievement for $120,000,000 the last 4 years? Does the state of Georgia have any answers?
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/tss_title.aspx
These are the latest figures from the employee survey suggesting budget cuts - It's telling in a way, that only 371 people actually responded and telling in another way that their suggestions almost run counter to ours...
These are posted as suggestion, number of times it was suggested and percentage of total..
Move to a 4‐day work week/alter school calendar
109 17.67%
Increase millage rate 71 11.51%
Use resources more efficiently (utilities, paper,
repairs, volunteers) 68 11.02%
Furlough/salary reduction/benefits reduction 68 11.02%
Reduce programs/testing expenses 65 10.53%
Other (Items resulting in additional costs or
unallowable uses) 44 7.13%
Reduce/delay textbook purchases 41 6.65%
Reduce marginal/ineffective/overstaffed personnel
38 6.16%
Generate revenue (surplus
sales/ads/property/grants) 26 4.21%
Offer early retirement options 21 3.40%
Reduce transportation offerings 15 2.43%
Utilize job sharing 14 2.27%
Consolidate small schools 8 1.30%
Enact student fees 8 1.30%
Reduce professional travel/regular travel 7 1.13%
Administrators substitute teach/reduce substitute
teacher pay 5 0.81%
Reduce/eliminate Athletics offerings 3 0.49%
Reinstate Meritorious Attendance award 2 0.32%
Require more documentation for absenteeism 2 0.32%
Outsource 2 0.32%
Total Number of Suggestions 617 100.00%
*Some respondents listed multiple suggestions
*Total Number of Respondents: 371
11/11/09 Through 01/31/2010
Considering admin and support (8,800) outnumber teachers (7,031) I'm not surprised at the outcome.
If DeKalb gets much lower on the teaching side, our school system will drag property values down all over the county. We won't need a national recession to devalue our property. Our school system will do it for us.
I moved here almost over 25 years ago for the schools. I sure wouldn't want to be moving here now with children. My husband and I are looking to move to North Fulton.
How did DCSS ever get to be such a service job machine? Very sad for people who are trapped here with mortgages that are upside down. Lots of kids in the county, but no one wants to teach - just live off the school system.
Post a Comment