School closures: It's an earthquake
The plan may affect nearly 10 percent of the district's schoolchildren. This is wise?
Seattle's school closure plan, now before the school board, is an earthquake. It’s not just a case of closing five schools. In addition to physically closing five buildings, Seattle Public Schools’ plan completely erases four other programs, scattering the students, and moves half the enrollment of the elementary and middle-school gifted programs to other buildings. Altogether, the scheme may affect more than 4,000 kids — pushing 10 percent — of the district’s 45,000 students.
Can that be good for the kids? What will their families do? How many will leave the district?
Those were among the questions that parents posed in public testimony at Wednesday night’s school board meeting, offering the obvious answers. No, that kind of disruption isn’t good for kids, especially the large number from low-income and minority families in the targeted schools. On this point, several African American parents were highly critical of district Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson, who is black. Adam Ellner, a student, chimed in, “This is like some domino game and the dominos at the end have no place to go except to fall down.” Ellner is a student in the accelerated progress program at Washington Middle School that would be split in half by Goodloe-Johnson’s plan.
Crucially, the question remains unanswered as to how many families will pull their children out of Seattle Public Schools if their schools are closed or they are forced to move from one to another against their will. Two years ago when seven schools were closed, 20 percent of the students directly affected disappeared from the district. So far, Goodloe-Johnson and her staff haven’t offered any estimates of what might happen this time — even though an enrollment drop of 200 to 300 students would wipe out all the short and long term savings projected from the closure plan. There’s no evidence yet that the seven-member school board is worried, or even curious, about this number.
On the budget front things have improved for the district. Governor Christine Gregoire’s budget didn’t cut education as deeply as expected, so the Seattle district’s shortfall projected last month to reach $37.1 million has dropped to $25 million. On Wednesday Don Kennedy, the district’s chief financial officer, showed the board a list of revenue increases and spending cuts to deal with that. Still included was the school closure plan, alleged to generate $3.6 million in savings in 2009-2010, though that must be offset by the $1.4 million this year and $500,000 next year the district will spend to close the buildings.
But notable among other cuts on Kennedy’s list was one change that mostly went unnoticed. Last month “central office” was slated for a $5 million cutback. Wednesday night that was quietly reduced to $4 million in a list that saw no other changes of that magnitude. Maybe when the board’s finance committee takes up budget details like that on Thursday, the fluidity of the central office numbers will raise some questions. After all, going back to $5 million in cuts, and maybe asking for another million or two in further pruning of central staff, would make it unnecessary to close schools in this chaotic, rushed fashion.
The other thing about looking at administrative staffing for budget cuts is this: You could take another $2 million, $3 million or maybe $4 million out of central office and not one family would pull a child out of Seattle Public Schools.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Fri, Jan 9, 9:26 a.m. inappropriate
The SSD lacks a true manefesto that inspires and draws parents and citizens to it. We removed our son this year after 6 frustrating years of poorly managed classrooms, clearly inbred thinking on the part of teachers and admin, and a "circle the wagons" approach to anyone who isn't in love with them. Rather than create a comprehensive plan that all parents and citizens can buy into and support, a by-product of which is closing some schools and changing programs - the school board and supt. have played process to address the symptoms of the issues afflicting SSD.
And on a purely personal note - did you hear Goodloe-Johnson on KUOW and other interview? Is this a person who speaks to you with personal connection and inspiration? Or is this a woman who speaks 'at' you with facts, figures, charts and information - but no real connection to what you (our city) is about.
Posted Fri, Jan 9, 11 a.m. inappropriate
If SSD enrollment went from 45,000 to 0 and all kids were private or home school beneficiaries, SSD would still want $550,000,000 and a Taj Mahal central planning edifice.
Posted Fri, Jan 9, 10:50 p.m. inappropriate
Surely there must be other options to saving money that have not yet been mentioned, rather than closing schools without a serious "masterplan" that holds water for more than a week before it is changed again. Our kids should not be the ones who shoulder this heavy price.
What about doing what King County has already started as one of their major budget cuts? All of the downtown administration should take one unpaid day off per month for ten months each year. "Fridays off!" for all of the John Stanford staff?
Second, what about the new Basic Education Finance Joint House & Senate Committee proposals that are currently listed on the WA Legislative website? Cheryl Chow, Seattle School Board Member, is a sponsor and member of one of the proposals to lower class sizes down to 17 students in the lower elementary classes and 15-25 in the middle school and high school grades. What will that do to the Seattle capacity if these proposals become law? What will be the costs to shift gears and re-open recently closed schools?
Why put Seattle students in this position of flux and turmoil until a proper plan is sorted out?
Posted Thu, Jan 15, 1:16 p.m. inappropriate
Wow Dick, you couldn't have said it better-cutting the Central Office back a little could mean not one student leaves Seattle Schools. Another way of putting this- school closures and program changes offer little savings (and no savings if student attrition occurs as expected)-in other words the budget gap will close with or without school closures and program transfers. One additional argument is that school closures with consolidation do not improve academic achievement- it's been said that the most efficient way to operate the 45,000 student Seattle School District is to have one school the size of Qwest Field but few would argue that this is the best way to deliver the product to the student. Why then would parents want to send their children to large schools in the face of knowledge that smaller schools perform better?
The word on the street is that Goodloe-Johnson doesn't care about attrition as a result of her program changing experiments. If this is the case, this is an inexcusable mindset for our head school administrator. Her experiments could have an irreversible impact on enrollment-students who leave and become reestablished elsewhere do not return to the Seattle Public Schools easily.
The School Board must step up and demand another form of "equity", that the bloated school administration cut itself more deeply in order to save students. Higher enrollment means more state dollars, student attrition means less money. The economies of scale of higher enrollment pay for everything from school facilities' fixed costs and even cover the costs of running a bloated school administration.
Accordingly, I propose that for ever percent of student attrition, that the School Administration cut its budget by the same amount. From the last closure/program disruption, I think the Administrators owe us a 20% cut based on the number of affected students leaving the district. Only by connecting their economic survival to enrollment will the School District start connecting the dots and change their mindset and start thinking about the students.
The parents of Seattle do alot and tolerate a lot to support their public schools-music and art programs funded only by bake sales and auctions, teacher's positions paid by PTAs, and old schools with lead pipes and no sprinklers. Yet what do we get from our school district? Wholesale disruption every few years, national media attention not for the great things happening in our schools but for wacky policy statements condemning individualism and summer vacations as racist, failed legal efforts advanced to the Federal Supreme Court and private investigators hired, no doubt at the behest of rival coaches, to kick out athletes from our inner city schools. All this negative attention makes it harder for parents to pass periodic school levies and ultimately the school district cuts its own lifeline.
Whatever the merits of these school district efforts, anyone can see a lack of focus on the bread and butter issues of simply running the schools. Compared to being part of the national debate with media attention, it's not sexy to ensure that the schools are clean and good principals and teachers are hired and supported. This begs the question- would we in fact be better off with fewer school administrators paying attention only to the nuts and bolts of running the schools?
Our administrators have lost focus with their mental machinations of flow charts and transferring programs all around town. (I can just imagine the total man-hours invested in this latest school closure debacle-it's gotta be in five digits after everything is said and done.) Academic achievement and enrollment stability and growth should be the goals when evaluating any program change or school closure. Under this standard, the School Administration needs to share the pain and accept cutbacks. Goodloe-Johnson should also evaluate how she wants to leave this district when she leaves-growing with a rising tide raising all ships or shrinking with divisiveness. Student attrition from the Seattle School District should matter in this debate.
Posted Thu, Jan 15, 1:27 p.m. inappropriate
One more thing, Seattle CB, when you mention things like the lack of personal connection and inspiration coming from our current superintendent, it makes me really miss the late John Stanford. He had the ability to make everyone feel that they were part of the same struggle and effort, including parents, the teachers' union and the business community. I would really like to hear inspiration from Goodloe-Johnson directed to a wider group of listeners on how she wants to make the Seattle School District grow and prosper for its students.