Klingenberg redux?

[OakParkSpartan]

Ted,  where did the teacher/student ratio you speak of come from?  I have had three kids at two different D100 elementary schools over the last nine years.  Never was a class size smaller than 25-28 students per class.

    I picked 20 per classroom as an ideal or average.  I think the teacher contract also limits the number per teacher.

  I just looked at the IIRC site and you're right.  The average in 2012 was around 23 to 25 per classroom in grades 1 to 5 and around 20 to 22 for grades 6 to 8.

  But, that means there should be even less teachers.  At 25 teachers per classroom and 4,000 kids, that is 160 teachers as the minimum.

  So, why does the district have 278 teachers in 2012?

It is a minimum Ted, not a maximum.

[buzz]

Ted, your entire focus in this thread is about cutting costs and things that you think the district is doing wrong.
You are feeding directly into the old Berwyn way of thinking that has kept school funding at embarrassingly low levels.

His focus has been on fiscal responsibility, why is that old Berwyn ?  Communities all over the collar counties have been voting down school referenda.  That will happen here.

[Ted]

It is a minimum Ted, not a maximum.

I know... that's what I said.  For a barebones budget, you need a minimum of around 160 teachers - 3 teachers per grade per building for grades 1 to 5 and 8 teachers per grade per building for grades 6 to 8 plus around 9 to 10 teachers for special ed.

  The proposed budget now has over 300 teaching positions - which is not a barebones budget. 

  A maximum is limited only by how much money you have and how much money you want to spend. The question is do you have the money to pay all those extra teachers?

[Ted]

From the first paragraph of his argument.  Thin air.

Ted, your entire focus in this thread is about cutting costs and things that you think the district is doing wrong.

I may have missed it, but very little focus (other than Chandez) is given to actually EDUCATING the kids and the results produced.

You are feeding directly into the old Berwyn way of thinking that has kept school funding at embarrassingly low levels.

  Why is it "thin air", Brian?  What is "thin air" about what I am saying?

I actually haven't been talking about cutting costs - my focus has been on not hiring into new positions that would increase costs and increase the size of the deficit.

  The district doesn't have the money to pay for these new programmes on an on-going basis unless the referenda passes.

  I am not against the referenda - my vote will depend on the size of the tax increase.  That is the only way to pay for these new initiatives.

  But, there needs to be a dialogue and discussion with the community about what it wants and what it is willing to pay for.  That hasn't happened.  Preaching to people and talking down at them about fiscal concerns is not the way to win their vote.  Neither is taking a "selling" approach as if you're selling a used car.

  During the referenda campaign, people are first going to ask if the board and district has tried to be fiscally responsible.  You and others may not like that, but it is a question that will be asked during the referenda campaign. 

  What would the answer be to that question?  That the district decided to jack up the deficit knowing there was only $12 million in the reserve fund?  That won't go over well with the voter.

So, Brian, it's not really cuts in existing costs I am talking about.  It is additional spending with new hires that are my concern.

[Berwyn Patsy]

1.  An education referendum to raise taxes will not pass, a dozen reasons, a dozen excuses  it doesn't matter at this time.  2.  Why isn't or is somebody going to ask why checks were made out to the Willow Church?  Maybe there is a perfectly good reason funds were issued?  The tax payer has a right to know the purpose of those cheeks written out.   Just my opinion.

[MRS. NORTHSIDER]

1.  An education referendum to raise taxes will not pass, a dozen reasons, a dozen excuses  it doesn't matter at this time.  2.  Why isn't or is somebody going to ask why checks were made out to the Willow Church?  Maybe there is a perfectly good reason funds were issued?  The tax payer has a right to know the purpose of those cheeks written out.   Just my opinion.

+1.  Last I heard, any mention of God, Allah, Buddha, Jehovah, Satan or whomever people worship in their religion in any way, shape or form is forbidden in public schools in this country.  There have been numerous lawsuits regarding this.  I do wonder why School District 100 has made checks out to the superintendent's church.  BTW, it's HIS job to make sure that the district follows the laws (especially Constitutional ones) in this regard. 

[OakParkSpartan]

From the first paragraph of his argument.  Thin air.

Ted, your entire focus in this thread is about cutting costs and things that you think the district is doing wrong.

I may have missed it, but very little focus (other than Chandez) is given to actually EDUCATING the kids and the results produced.

You are feeding directly into the old Berwyn way of thinking that has kept school funding at embarrassingly low levels.

  Why is it "thin air", Brian?  What is "thin air" about what I am saying?

I actually haven't been talking about cutting costs - my focus has been on not hiring into new positions that would increase costs and increase the size of the deficit.

  The district doesn't have the money to pay for these new programmes on an on-going basis unless the referenda passes.

  I am not against the referenda - my vote will depend on the size of the tax increase.  That is the only way to pay for these new initiatives.

  But, there needs to be a dialogue and discussion with the community about what it wants and what it is willing to pay for.  That hasn't happened.  Preaching to people and talking down at them about fiscal concerns is not the way to win their vote.  Neither is taking a "selling" approach as if you're selling a used car.

  During the referenda campaign, people are first going to ask if the board and district has tried to be fiscally responsible.  You and others may not like that, but it is a question that will be asked during the referenda campaign. 

  What would the answer be to that question?  That the district decided to jack up the deficit knowing there was only $12 million in the reserve fund?  That won't go over well with the voter.

So, Brian, it's not really cuts in existing costs I am talking about.  It is additional spending with new hires that are my concern.

You haven't talked about cutting costs?

2. 2 Teachers per classroom initiative - A few years ago the district started an initiative to have 2 teachers per classroom. Given the budget situation, I think the district should go back to 1 teacher per classroom and lay off the extra teacher in each classroom.

Most people consider layoffs a cost cutting measure (especially those laid off).

[Ted]

 Brian,  that was in response to Chandasz's question about how I would balance the budget.  To balance the budget, you would need to lay off people.

But, my main focus in this discussion has been more about the additional hires.  If the district is expecting to run a $4 million dollar deficit, then starting a new initiative that requires hiring more people that pushes the deficit above $6 million is not a fiscally sound idea, especially when the reserve fund has only $12 million dollars.

That's why my first action, in response to Chandasz, was NO NEW HIRES!

Most people in a situation where they had a large deficit like that would put on a hiring freeze - they wouldn't be hiring 43 new people.

What if the City of Berwyn had proposed a budget with a $6 million dollar deficit on $40 million in revenue and that one third of the deficit was due to hiring 43 new people?

  Would your reaction be the same as it is with D100 hiring 43 new people?
 

[Bonster]

Chandasz, I, too, am curious about the impact of full day K.
Since we do not have Preschool for All (or just D100 for this matter), could half day Kindergarten could free up resources for more preschool entries, thereby filling in gaps not covered <too late> by any length of Kindergarten?

[Ted]

2.  Why isn't or is somebody going to ask why checks were made out to the Willow Church?  Maybe there is a perfectly good reason funds were issued?  The tax payer has a right to know the purpose of those cheeks written out.   Just my opinion.

  There were 6 separate payments made over a 12 month period - 3 of the payments were the same amount - $79.00.

  I can't think of a single reason to pay a religious organization that would benefit District 100 and which would be constitutional - especially since the church is in Barrington, not Berwyn and especially since this is the church Stan Fields attends.

[Ted]

So are you going to bring these expenses up at the next d101 board meeting?

d101?  What is d101?  If you're referring to D100, maybe you're on the right track. Maybe we should start calling the district D101 because it is more and more becoming like D201.

  The FOIA that I saw for Fields expenses has more pages in it than War and Peace.  The board knows about the FOIA (FOIA requests are an agenda item at every board meeting) and they know about the expense charges.  They've known about Field's charging habits for quite some time.

  Why should I tell the board something they already know? 

Heck, Mustang54 appears to already know about a lot of this stuff.  If a guy in Cicero knows about it, you don't think the board knows about it? ...  LOL

  It's up to the board to do something about it, not me.

[Sandy]

As the move is towards mainstreaming special needs children, a centralized location is not feasible. These children must be educated in the LRE or Least Restrictive Environment.