kitchen table math, the sequel: instructional coaches & class size

Saturday, March 13, 2010

instructional coaches & class size

from anonymous:
In my district out here in California we are cutting K-2 class size reduction (back up to 30 from 20), middle and high school counselors, and numerous other supports. We are however, KEEPING our 3.5 "literacy coaches" in our small district of 3 elementary schools, 1 middle and 1 high school.

Part of the argument is that coaches support new teachers. Problem is we are laying off all the new teachers. These lit coaches actually represent a hidden administrative cost, as it's the admins who want them. They are de facto assistant principals for principals who have next-to-no curriculum expertise. We've had coach positions for 12 years now... yet we are still seen as needing continuous prof. development. Unlike puberty, one never gets to the end of one's (professional) development.

Ironically, our current coach is less experienced than most of the staff at our school. The coaching thing has become a sacred cow that should have dried up long ago.

1 comment:

lgm said...

Same here. Turned out the low class size was being paid for by grants and the grants weren't renewed. Judging by the numbers, the class sizes at avg. 20 weren't low enough to make any difference than when they were at 28 for Gr. 1-2. I doubt there will be any savings, as there no doubt will have to be add'l 1:1 aides hired.

I asked our admin what the cost savings would be if transitional 1st and or 3rd grade was put in instead of having all the remedial personnel. It's a very unpopular suggestion. Parents want their children to graduate with their agemates. They don't understand that their child who isn't reading English fluently by Gr. 3 is not going to catch up, will be dropped into double period classes in middle/high school & will be repeating required classes in high school, meaning he's not going to graduate with his agemates.