School closures: let's get more cards on the table
It's become a trade off between cutting staff positions and building closures. The teachers' union quietly comes out for closures, but we still don't know enough about the options to judge well.
School closures and program moves for Seattle Schools have been under discussion for a month now and Linda Shaw’s story in The Seattle Times today is the first to lay out the tradeoff that’s been a focus of school employee and teacher attention. In the background all along, it’s been employment versus building operating costs.
Shaw reports that the Seattle Education Association, the union representing teachers, this week voted to reaffirm the union’s position favoring closure. The discussion at the representative council meeting must have been lively, since a proposal to abandon the earlier resolution got nearly 50 percent of the votes, according to Shaw. (A two-thirds majority is needed to change union policy.)
It’s telling that SEA has been silent for the past month while the district and parents agonize over ever-changing closure plans. Last time around, then-SEA President Wendy Kimball and others testified at every opportunity in favor of closures. The union’s silence so far is evidence that drawing attention to their stand last time got them burned by parents and some of their members, at least those in the schools slated for closure. Hence the nearly 50 percent dissent this time around.
It’s also worth noting that the other budget cuts so far put on the table by Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson — among them $5 million from central office, $4.2 million in school funding cuts (class size increases in grades 4 and 5), and a $2 million hiring freeze — are part of a list that still comes $10 million short of meeting a projected $37 million revenue shortfall. That means more cuts to come, and they will almost entirely have to come from staff, teachers, and others, since more than 80 percent of the district’s budget is payroll.
Faced with such large additional cuts, the school board needs to ask Goodloe-Johnson to put the whole package on the table for everyone to see. How deep is a $5 million cut from central office? How many staff are cut and what are they doing now? How many more can be cut? How many teaching positions need to be cut? How many teachers’ aides? Taking into account the effects of the hiring freeze, how many teachers and teachers aides will lose their jobs? What will the impact be? And how will that impact compare with closing schools? (For sake of argument, if an elementary teacher costs $60,000 per year including benefits, then laying off 60 teachers would raise $3.6 million and allow the district to drop entirely the current school closure plan and wait a year until there’s a new assignment plan in place and closures, if any, can be better planned.)
It’s time for the district to ask its constituents up front whether they want to close schools or let class sizes rise by two or three students while we get through this recession. Unfortunately, what’s driving district staff and the teachers union is a justifiable fear, given the budget cutting still to come, that the impact on staff and class sizes will be worse than this, with layoffs that will go way beyond the teacher vs. school closure tradeoff. All the more reason for the board to ask to see all the cards now.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Thu, Dec 18, 2:03 p.m. inappropriate
The SEA Representative Assembly did not vote by almost 50% to endorse school closures. Over 50% voted to rescind the 2005 resolution endorsing school consolidation, but it was short of 2/3. Rejecting school closures cannot be cited as the reason for the upcoming layoffs that SPS will ask for. By their own figures, just implementing the closures will cost 2.6 million dollars, (Donald Kennedy, CFO, December 15th) almost equivalent to the purported savings. High level District representatives (Tolley) have said that there will be layoffs whether or not schools are closed. This contradicts the stated position of incoming STate Superintendent Randy Dorn that economic challenges should not be solved on the backs of K-12 students. Do we just ignore the state constitutional mandate that the highest priority of state government is to ensure equitable education for all? 15,000 millionaires in this county. Have appreciated Mr. Lilly's fair-minded comments until this time. Dare we broach the subject of taxation?
Posted Thu, Dec 18, 6:40 p.m. inappropriate
There is nothing more I would like to see than the current gov / demos / teacher union back a new / increase re taxes.
Maybe, just maybe, that would be the final straw to push the voters in this state to throw out the demos ! All of them !
You teach nine months, not a full 12 ! Unless your in one of the few subject areas that have updating circ needs, after a year or two, you really don't have a tough workload, if your a smart, competent teacher. You have a union, that IF it had leadership, could be pushing the rotten degenerates out of the classroom and back to their so called parents - which is where they should be. As it is, the transmitted message is that the schools have become parents ( counselors, free morning and noon food and free supplies for the 'needy' ) thus simply more money wasted and rewards to those who create children and then don't stick around to be parents. As for your part teacher, you seem to condone this system all the while crying for more money. Is your undergraduate degree in the field you are teaching ?
"if my class size was 2, boy, then i could really teach ! "
In the state of Washington, it is clear why public education has become left behind - broken.
Posted Thu, Dec 18, 9:39 p.m. inappropriate
I have to speak up about the snide comment on "tough work load" and "updating". My children's teachers in K, 1 and 2 have been "wow, wow and wow" teachers. I camped out overnight so my children could get into a tuition based all day kindergarten, and it was definitely worth it.
I have noticed a few differences in the K program for children even just 2 years apart, and definitely the teachers have some new challenges every year because each class has its own dynamics. Some of these differences are because of district or state mandates, for example rolling out a new math curriculum at one level does impact other levels as well. It takes some time to adjust what exercises to use, etc.
A comment on Parents: some are much more able to volunteer in the classroom than others. Some have the time, or ability or interest. My hunch is that the so-called higher scoring schools tend to have more parent involvement.
However, this doesn't just happen automatically. I have never thought of teachers as managers, but in reality: they are. They are just managing volunteers instead of direct reports. It does take some managerial skill to delegate tasks, whether it is something like an art project for the day, or just lining up someone to read with a child who needs some extra attention.
My sense is even the veteran teachers are putting in a very full day. I think they have 9 weeks "off" in the summer, but I also get the sense part of this time is spent on skills and course development.
To close: my children's classes have had 24 or so students, and I've never heard the teachers complain about the class size. However, it does help greatly that there are specialists to help with speech, with math and with reading. That may or may not count as a class size reduction, but effectively it does provide teachers with some leverage of their time, making the class experience more efficient.