Posts
So now we have towns like Irvington where you can buy a simple raised ranch on a half acre for $600K and pay $21,757 a year in taxes to pay for schools that use curricula like Everyday Math. [ed: Not even. We've got Trailblazers.] I had to double check that tax assessment. How about a split level on a quarter acre (on the market for $800K) with taxes of $27,150.Our taxes doubled in 10 years' time with no measurable gains in student achievement. Curriculum quality significantly declined during that period (e.g.: Trailblazers, Fountas & Pinnell). Teacher quality may have declined, too (I don't know), given that the district stopped hiring teachers with experience because teachers with experience are too expensive. For over a decade, the district has hired only first-year teachers, nearly all of whom have been given tenure regardless of parent opinion.
The new union contract, signed this year, provides around 4% annual overall increase in compensation. Twice the rate of inflation.
Average teacher salary - base salary - is now $100K. Add in pensions, which taxpayers fund, and average salary is around $120K (if not more). Meanwhile, average household salary in Irvington -- household, not individual -- is $117K.
The third possibility is to persuade the union to accept compensation increases indexed to inflation. As far as I know, I'm the only person in town who thinks that's an option. The only person at present, I should say.
I can't tell how things will play out.
At this week's BOE meeting, 100 parents and high school students lined up to protest cuts.
No one lined up to protest the contract that put us in the position of having to make these cuts. Union negotiations are conducted in secret, and when the new tax-cap busting contract was finally agreed to, after years of negotiations, it was hailed. In fact, the new contract is less rich than the old contract, so that's what everyone focused on.
Cuomo's tax cap is an interesting law.
Second, the school board is taking a bit of a risk by putting forward a budget that breaks the tax cap. If the board does not get a 60% majority, it has one more chance to put forward a budget. If that budget also breaks the cap, and also fails to attract a 60% vote, the district then goes to zero: NO increase from the previous year's tax levy at all. Instead of 10 FTEs cut, suddenly you're looking at 20.
No one wants cuts, and no one wants to talk (out loud) about the union. (Everyone talks about the union sotto voce.) So what will happen?
We'll see.
26 comments:
"I can't tell how things will play out. ... At this week's BOE meeting, 100 parents and high school students lined up to protest cuts."
This is like our schools. The town council demands a cut in terms of dollars, so the school and school committee come up with options that include sports, services, and programs that they know are hot button issues for parents. Then, they send home notes to parents to flood the town council meeting. I got one of these notes and (of course) I didn't like the cuts. They had nothing to do with teacher salaries. At best, they might axe certain teaching positions, but the clear signal is that fewer teaching positions means a poorer education.
This is not a process to control long-term educational costs. These are just last minute cuts to balance the yearly budget. They can't reopen contract talks to lower costs. Those talks continue in private at a separate time with no specific budget target to achieve. As you say, savings are only relative.
It struck me once that the cost to live in different towns varies greatly, and it has little to do with the quality of schools or some vague quality of life or affluence factor. Our town has good schools (comparatively), but the taxes for a house valued at $550K is $4800. The average house price is probably closer to $800K. There is no reason for a town like Irvington to have schools that cost so much per student.
At $27K per student, doesn't anyone ask what's going on? Try comparing Irvington with White Plains High School with an enrollment of 2200 kids. Find other towns that have enrollment sizes of 1500 and 1000 students. Compare costs, courses, activities, and sports.
Because of our town's occasional high school search process, I find that some people have a big preference for smaller schools. You will pay dearly for that, and you will end up with fewer classes and opportunities. I got to see comparisons between a number of schools in our area. Some don't like the 1600 student size of our current high school of record, but the opportunities are so much better. People might point to poorer NCLB statistics, but that doesn't say anything about how the top 50% are doing. It doesn't show many other intangible factors.
This weekend, our high school has 4 performances of the spring musical. With so many students to tap, the production is amazing. Four performances of selling out 700 seats at $10 per ticket. You can't do anything like that at a small school. The school has a full concert band and a full string orchestra. Expensive private schools can't compete with that.
Irvington really needs to start thinking about combining high schools with neighboring towns.
"With so many students to tap, the production is amazing."
This is one thing that some parents don't like about big high schools -- the performance was amazing, but there aren't any more spots available for speaking parts, so proportionally fewer students got those roles. Which means fewer of them get to put that on their college apps. There is only one first violin after all, no matter how many students play in the orchestra!
High schools will never, ever be combined anywhere in the U.S.
High schools have athletic teams, and people are devoted to their teams.
We've been watching the Friday Night Lights series -- it tells you everything you need to know about the prospects for savings via consolidation...
Catherine, that isn't true. When I was about to start high school, my district closed the "other" high school in town (the one not named for the town). Similarly, my husband drove by the high school his much older siblings attended to go to the "name" school. "His" high school had been sold and turned into a chiropractic college.
In California at least, it was a common Gen Ex experience to have your expected school closed. There was a lot of fuss over it (and yes, a lot of it was about the sports teams), and I'm not sure combining the schools was actually a good idea (among other things, it put the cross-town gangs on one campus), but it has happened.
There are plenty of combined high schools in NH and I think there are some here in CT too. In CA, my high school had kids from several surrounding towns. No biggie, really.
Agree with ChemProf. The continual complaint here in a 1800 student high school is that there are not enough teams or extracurricular oppportunities, and that the spots that do exist are going to those who are affluent enough to do the clubs, camps, travel ball, or tutoring/private lessons that lead to gaining the spots.
Others complain about the bussing. 45 to 65 minute rides are common; folks would rather have 2 smaller high schools than one big one just to cut the transport time down to reasonable for everyone.
My complaint of course is that there aren't enough academic courses. It's absolutely ridiculous that a school this size can't field the min class size for a section of AP Chem or Calc BC.
kcab - oh yes it is a biggie!
We couldn't even get the town of Irvington & the town of Dobbs Ferry to combine police forces! Forget the schools with their TEAMS!
The head of the search firm told us a hilarious story, but unfortunately I've forgotten some of the details.
One of the parents present for the meeting said we need to consolidate districts.
I said districts will never agree to do that because of the teams.
The search firm guy told us that he headed a district that was next door to a district that had only .... gosh was it 300 kids total?
Something like that.
Even with only 300 kids, that district refused to merge in order to save money.
There was a lot of fuss over it (and yes, a lot of it was about the sports teams), and I'm not sure combining the schools was actually a good idea
As far as I can tell, consolidation isn't particularly effective in terms of cost savings -- and it seems to create as many problems as it solves.
The Price of Government has a section about the various consolidations that have been tried.
They sound like a good idea on paper, but in reality you have all kinds of 'human elements,' I guess you'd call it, that gum things up.
Where did you live, btw? Meaning: how did your district manage to close schools over parent objections?
Actually, closing schools **isn't** so hard. It's the same district.
What is extremely hard is merging or consolidating two separate districts with two separate identities and two separate allegiances.
Closing a school within a district is going to kick up the dust, but it's a different order of change.
Especially with small schools and small towns, the school is like the country. The teams are like the town's army -- and countries don't merge armies.
It's absolutely ridiculous that a school this size can't field the min class size for a section of AP Chem or Calc BC.
Every once in a while I have an impulse to move to your town just to be pis*** off IN PERSON.
That's a joke, having a school that small. Who wants to go to a 300 person high school?! Whoops, wait, that's 300 people total? That's just silly. I'd never send a high school student to a school with a 30 person graduating class.
Anyway, there are plenty of towns that can't afford to have their own high school. They end up having to pay tuition to neighboring towns. Typically that means that the kids go to schools where the parents are unable to vote on the school board members. Banding together to create a joint high school is a more agreeable idea in some places. The small towns you're thinking of are just mired in their current way of thinking, but will have to change if the funding hits the fan the way you expect. Change might cause some fuss for awhile, but people *are* capable of adapting.
"There is only one first violin after all, no matter how many students play in the orchestra!"
Do people really only care about bullets on resumes? Are colleges not able to see the difference? You would be surprised how many students got a chance at major parts. Freshmen had major roles. Do kids want to play athletics in division 3. No. They find resources outside of school if they have to. Some parents might want small schools for more opportunities for average ability kids, but they are fooling themselves if they think it will look good on a college app.
"... and that the spots that do exist are going to those who are affluent enough to do the clubs, camps, travel ball, or tutoring/private lessons that lead to gaining the spots."
But in a small school, students will never get to that level anyway. What model do you expect from any size school? Larger schools have the economies of scale and the resorces to do lots of things at all levels of ability. If they choose not to, then that is another issue. I can see problems if a high school gets too large, but I don't see many benefits of a small high school.
"They end up having to pay tuition to neighboring towns. Typically that means that the kids go to schools where the parents are unable to vote on the school board members."
Yes, but we get to go to a neighboring town if we want, and some of those small high schools try really hard to get our students. We've just gone through this process, and it's clear that smaller high schools (<600 students) just can't compete. Most parents here want the larger school opportunities and competition - not some easy bullets on applications.
I can, however, see how the "human" aspect of combining schools wouldn't work, but you will pay a big price for that. We will never tuition out our K-8 students, but once you get to high school, it works.
I grew up in a town outside of Oakland (San Leandro). The high school was ~2000 students then and is ~2700 now. Before they closed Pacific, the other high school, both schools were around 1500, but after consolidation they kept the 9th graders at the junior highs (now middle schools). So it wasn't about tiny schools, but about selling off the expensive land to raise money for the district. That wasn't uncommon in California in the late 80's (during the last real estate boom). My husband can tell almost the same story in Southern California (near Fullerton), and among Californians near my age, you can distinguish young boomers from older Gen Xers by whether schools closed before or after they would have attended.
But in both cases, this was closing schools within a district, not combining districts.
Interestingly, after combining the high schools, we lost the drama program entirely for a decade or so. It had been run by someone who was mostly at Pacific and who retired in part due to the closure.
It may actually be beneficial to split our district in two. That would give a middle and new high school Title I funding. Right now, we have a significant remedial need, but aren't on average poor enough for the funding. Splitting into two high schools and rezoning middle schools would do it.
I kind of liked Hillsboro OR scenario. 3 smaller high schools; your kid wants IB/AP, he goes to that high school rather than be stuck in one that offers nothing.
Perhaps it is time for NY to change the tax rate on multi-family rentals so that those families can share a little more in the school tax, rather than burdening the single family home owners as much.
I'm sure there are formulas that relate costs to the size of a high school. Scheduling and minimum class size requirements are big factors. We found that in evaluating schools, you have to ask what courses have been taught, not just what courses are in the catalog. Also, if a school has a course, what are the minimum number of students required to open up a new section?
On a strictly cost basis, one might claim that larger is always better. But once you take in other factors, the optimum size drops down. Our town doesn't have experience at comparing schools at the upper level, but we have compared our current 1600 student school of record with several below 1000 students. It seems that when you get to about 600 or less, courses, sports, and activities really start to disappear. In spite of that, some seem to prefer smaller schools. They think that smaller is somehow friendlier and more supportive; that average kids get more opportunity to shine. It isn't necessarily so. If a school can't afford a sport, then nobody gets any chance.
Even at the very fancy prep school in our area (360 students in high school), not everyone is above average, and there are not enough students to separate them by ability. Just because there may be only 10 students in a class, it doesn't mean that students are able to learn more or faster, or that the teacher is going to track students down to ensure learning. (The school also has mandatory sports for all kids. Otherwise, they won't have enough kids to form some teams.)
This different view of small versus large is a real fudge factor variable in our town. It caused the review committee to rate virtually all neighboring schools as "viable". This really stretched the limits of intangible weighting factors. They didn't even calibrate those fudge factors and include them in a merit function. This leaves the door open (at some point) to change high schools based on a vote between "viable" schools. We didn't change after the latest review, but you could see the battle lines forming. The parents who were looking to challenge their kids and offer the most competitive environment preferred the larger school. The small school parents were the ones who seemed to prefer a less competitive and natural approach to learning.
Another difference was subtle. The larger high school better reflected the mix of students in a larger community, whereas the smaller school only offered an affluent mix of students. The small school supporters would never put it that way, but the larger school supporters clearly liked the more real world environment. This mix helped the small schools with the comparison numbers when they took into account the entire population of students. The larger school had more opportunities and better AP results, but the smaller school had better NCLB state test numbers. Ironically, the smaller school was supposed to be appealing to parents who care more about AP classes than low NCLB cutoffs.
It was interesting that at the formal presentation to our school committee by a neighboring town (600 students), they really tried to downplay or dismiss the importance of AP classes. One teacher even said something about how doing well in an AP class was simply a reflection of your mother's IQ, although she didn't use the term IQ. And, of course, a past student talked about how she could try out all sorts of sports and activities. What most kids want, however, is to have access to the best opportunities for their special interests. It is physically impossible to do more than one or two activities at the same time, and many activities overlap.
Our "human" issue is whether those who have the authority to change schools (at some point) will stretch the limits of "viable" to pick the school they just happen to like.
"Interestingly, after combining the high schools, we lost the drama program entirely for a decade or so. It had been run by someone who was mostly at Pacific and who retired in part due to the closure."
My wife and I were talking about this. It's not just school size. It's the teachers who are willing to put in the extra work. Large schools don't guarantee anything. Much has to do with history and continuity. Booster clubs can try to ensure continuity, but you need some teacher to provide the leadership.
There is also the continuity from the lower schools to the upper schools. For example, all of the feeder middle schools to our high school do extremely well in the state's Science Olympiad, but once those students get to high school, there is nothing. They don't field a high school team.
Where I grew up in CT, we had a great feeder system in music from the lower grades through high school. I don't know how this got started, but it evolved from the leadership of two music teachers.
"We found that in evaluating schools, you have to ask what courses have been taught, not just what courses are in the catalog."
You also need to look at the courses offered in preparation for AP. When I went to high school, there were two sections of honors. When AP was offered, which wasn't often in that era, there were two sections offered and all the honors students took the AP class. Now, for 9th grade English, that same high school offers 7 honors sections, but they only offer two sections of AP English for seniors (and another 5 honors sections). Looking at that, and reading between the lines of their materials, it is clear that we don't actually offer honors level courses before AP. Instead, what they call honors is what we used to call college prep. Given that, I'd be concerned about how well student are actually prepared for AP courses.
kcab - I think I got the number wrong!
It may have been THIRTY.
I'm not sure whether they had a high school at all. (I wonder if I took notes....I should look.)
The real figure may have been THIRTY. An entire school district with 30 kids, and the district refused to merge with a larger district.
Either way - 30 or 300 - people don't give up a school-based cultural identity without a fight. At least, not in my experience.
"Interestingly, after combining the high schools, we lost the drama program entirely for a decade or so. It had been run by someone who was mostly at Pacific and who retired in part due to the closure."
Right!
There are all kinds of unanticipated and not-good sequelae to consolidations & mergers (true in the private sector as well, right?)
When you try to 'force' a marriage between two organizations, there are a lot of challenges. (I'm not taking an absolutist stance - I'm sure there are times it works well. BUT the "Price of Government" people advise against it.)
What I think **can** work (based in my brother-in-law's experience) is keeping the two organizations or institutions but having them specialize in the different functions.
So, for instance, his college merged food services with another college. They didn't merge the colleges; they merged food services.
BUT, the merger wasn't actually a merger. One college was doing a much better job of handling food services so that department took over food services for the other college, and the other college's food services operation was closed.
I can easily see small high schools specializing: one school might be particularly strong in languages, another in math, etc. Kids could go to different schools for different subjects (if the schools are close by, obviously)
It may actually be beneficial to split our district in two. That would give a middle and new high school Title I funding. Right now, we have a significant remedial need, but aren't on average poor enough for the funding. Splitting into two high schools and rezoning middle schools would do it.
right - classic example where the 'inefficiencies' of splitting the school would be beneficial
Perhaps it is time for NY to change the tax rate on multi-family rentals so that those families can share a little more in the school tax, rather than burdening the single family home owners as much.
It is WAAAAAYYYY past time.
But as far as I can tell (I don't know state politics at all), it's never going to happen. A friend of mine was explaining it to me....has to do with NYC not needing a change in the law.
There's no one to power a change through, in other words -- and there ARE many who benefit.
For people who aren't familiar with NY law, condos are taxed at half the rate of single-family houses.
(I don't know what the tax situation is for rentals & landlords.)
What attracts me to large high schools is the ability to do 'real' professional learning communities.
Adlai Stevenson High School, the school where PLCs were invented, has 500 kids.
In a PLC, you have same-subject teachers meeting regularly, writing common assessments, & then analyzing the results in order to improve teaching.
If you have only one teacher teaching AP Euro, you don't have a PLC (unless you can partner with other high schools).
How big would schools need to be though? Again, my old high school has 2700 students, but still only has two people teaching AP US History. And no one teaching AP Euro as far as I can tell! Admittedly, this is not a high SES district.
Post a Comment