Newest Seattle Schools Messaging on Staff Cuts at Schools
From SPS Communications (to my e-mail at 5 pm):
Media: The
following letter is being distributed to all SPS families this
afternoon. It is a reminder of our annual required enrollment count
process. We are still in the process of finalizing
staffing adjustments at schools, therefore individual school
information is not available at this time. Once adjustments are final,
principals will communicate with their schools.
Every
year at the start of the school, districts across Washington State go
through a process of comparing enrollment projections with actual
student counts. School districts receive state
funding to pay for staffing based on actual student enrollment (counts)
as of October 1st. Seattle Public Schools (SPS) undergoes a staffing
adjustment process to monitor enrollment at every school, adjust
staffing levels relative to actual student enrollment,
and comply with negotiated staffing ratios. This process is not unique
to Seattle; all districts undergo the same process of staffing
adjustments by school relative to the actual numbers of students who
enroll and attend. Staffing adjustment decisions are
made to match student needs with limited staff resources
across the district.
In
Seattle, 52,399 students enrolled in the district this year, according
to the 10-day student enrollment count. That is an increase of 411
students over last year. While we have more
students this year, the number is lower than we projected by 675
students. This translates into $4.23 million in less revenue, not
including the enrollment decline impact on Special Education,
Transportation or Nutrition Services. The reduction in staffing
allocations will reduce the impact of the loss of revenue. The number
of students who left the school district to go to another is higher this
year than last year.
As
your principal may have shared with you, staffing adjustment
recommendations were developed by a team of representatives from School
Operations, Human Resources, Enrollment Planning,
Special Education, Budget, Capital Planning, Continuous Improvement,
and English Language Learning using enrollment data. The team considers
multiple factors including equity and detailed school, class and program
configuration. Staffing allocation analyses
are conducted at the individual class and grade level. Staffing
allocations were reviewed and approved by the Superintendent’s Cabinet.
Some schools have additional enrollment and
require additional staff. Some schools have lower enrollments and
require staff reductions.
It
is important to note, teachers and instructional assistants will
continue to be employed by SPS. Each staff member will be reassigned to
another school. This process is
a careful matching of individual skills and qualifications of
certificated staff to school positions and needs.
Eight
start-of-school substitutes were added district-wide and funded
centrally in schools where principals believed their enrollment
number was going to be higher than the district projection. Principals
used this resource to support start of school efforts. The goal is to
reduce the number of classes without a teacher, and to mitigate for last
minute enrollment changes. Based on enrollment
counts and class configurations, seven of these eight substitutes will
be removed from their schools and returned to the substitute pool
because anticipated enrollment did materialize at the individual
schools. The eighth will be converted to a teaching position
to support enrollment.
The
School Board has highlighted resource stewardship as a board priority,
refocusing the district on the importance of assuring responsible
management of its limited funding.
While more students are enrolled this year, the number is still lower
than projected. With less revenue district-wide, SPS must reduce the
staffing budget from schools with lower enrollment and add staffing
budgets to schools with higher enrollment to ensure
our class sizes and support personnel are equitably distributed to best
support all students’ teaching and learning.
Additional
good news is that elementary schools have benefited from an increase in
funding for teachers in order to reduce class size (about one
additional teacher per building) as part
of the Legislature’s action in June. And the district has invested
more in staffing for unique situations (mitigation) than we did last
year. Reductions are never easy – and especially so after the school
year begins. Average class sizes district-wide, however,
are improved over last year at the elementary level.
We
know that these changes are not easy for our schools, students, staff,
and parents/guardians. Such decisions are a delicate balance of
financial resources and needs
across the entire school district. Our district team takes this
work very seriously and tremendous effort and thought goes into every
decision about every classroom in every school as the team works hard to
allocate limited resources to the greatest
need. In a situation where one school loses a staff member, that
individual is moved to a school which has less staff and desperately
needs more.
Staffing adjustments are being finalized, and your school principal will communicate that information once completed.
Michael Tolley Flip Herndon
Associate Superintendent Associate Superintendent
Teaching and Learning Facilities and Operations
Comments
To make matters worse, Tolley/Henderdon throw the board under the bus.
Where is Nyland in this story?
Also, such BS about average class sizes being smaller at the elementary level. Unless I'm missing something huge?
-flibber
Also, why not give a two week window to give parents and their students a chance to switch schools and balance resources that way first. If you know the option might be better ELL or slightly smaller class sizes or even a more desirable school or location then maybe the change could happen at the student level. But no one ever offers the option.
the difference between a countable and an uncountable noun.
Hey with Readers and Writers workshop how can you expect Tolley to know this?
I mean really is precision with language of any importance "to be College and Career ready"?
-- Dan Dempsey
Sped Reader
Ballard
A kick in the teeth to families who are already reeling because they've just lost their teachers.
Is there no one at SPS who (a) can write coherently and (b) is tasked with communicating with parents proactively (BEFORE public outcry)?
Just awful.
Imagine what it would be like to live in a city where doing things better was at least something we pretended to strive for.
SW Mom
-HS Parent
Here's the one line that stands out to me:
While we have more students this year, the number is lower than we projected by 675 students
So....what that says to me is "we screwed up on projecting so your kids are going to have to suffer upheaval, but hey, we tried...."
bleaaahh - these people are so obtuse. You got it wrong, so YOU, SPS Admin, should have to lose someone on YOUR payroll, not at the school level. You have jobs BECAUSE there are schools. Why is it y'all keep forgetting that? Sigh....
reader47
My favorite in this letter is that they want parents NOT TO WORRY! Staff will still have jobs! What about my KIDS, who just got used to one schedule, settled in a series of courses with familiar teachers, who have to start from scratch? Do they have no kids, or have they never worked with kids before? Moving class on Oct 12th SUCKS. Combining geometry with algebra SUCKS. 28 kids in an elementary class in a growing part of town with inevitable incoming students (like all of the last 4 years... LOOK at the data!) SUCKS. I'm happy to hear that the teachers have jobs, but I'm more concerned that this district screws up enrollment EVERY YEAR and kids pay the price EVERY YEAR.
The district office needs to learn that they're simply employees, like the rest of us, not gods or royalty. They work for us, with us... not above us. They are not our bosses, they just have a different job than we have. They should actually enter our school buildings, engage in dialogue with staff about needs and trends, and learn from us. We staffs are NEVER surprised in the number of !surprise! kids that show up to our school the way the district is.
Signed,
Disgusted.
Not Impressed
The money is saved by not hiring substitutes over the course of the year.
They have long admitted that they do not track on reasons students leave the district - whether for private, or moving away, or to squeeze into another district (many of which, as has been pointed out, have closed to additional out-of-district students). How are they so sure that students left because of the strike, rather than maybe being on the waitlist for another district all summer?
And if they have the data, why are they not sharing the public enrollment data about students leaving SPS for area private schools or other area districts?
SW Mom
How, exactly, will that help students? Missing days of school, again? If you want to send a message, OPT OUT of SBAC. This school year.
When a student leaves one district for another district, they fill out an inter-district transfer form. SPS should have data on the number of transfers both in and out. If a student chooses private school, or moves, they simply don't have a record of where they went.
-a reader
I know it is hard to get projections right, but why the district insists on not just saying that ----- and instead blames an enrollment projection error on the strike -------simply seems wrong. It's an incredibly provocative statement. I had hoped Dr. Nyland was a more thoughtful leader than this statement indicates, so I am deeply, deeply disappointed.
This appears to be another example of what many of us think is the true problem with SPS: deadwood + rot downtown. Blame "it" on families. Blame "it" on teachers. Never deep self-analysis of JSCEE. Never an apology. Just stonewalling.
If we can't fix the core how can we ever keep the branches --- our schools -- healthy?
EdVoter
Then again, not everyone officially disenrolls. But, they could do outreach, right? Do schools do this themselves? If a student is on their roster but hasn't shown up all of September, do they call those families and inquire? Or does no one try to find out where that student is?
I also wonder if with inter-district transfers, they don't become official until October 1, which is maybe why Nyland said what he said? Let's say I request and get granted a transfer to Shoreline in the spring for the next school year. Perhaps Shoreline waits until they have their October 1 numbers before officially claiming the SPS student? Or do you lose your SPS spot as soon as you are granted the transfer? I'm just thinking out loud about how it might be possible to have it *appear* that a bunch of transfers happened in the fall when in reality families had those plans all along. Just speculating.
And I have to agree with those on others threads who feel that increases in disenrollments are due to instability and unpredictability. With a kid in the class of 2021, I have absolutely no idea right now where she will go to or graduate high school. After all the other capacity-related stressors we endured over 6 years, we sought other options and took one. I just couldn't handle the drama and uncertainty any more. It's sad, because in my heart I'm a public school parent and supporter, but I had no idea it would be so exasperating and, quite frankly, detrimental to my emotional well being.
As I stated before, everyone I know of that opted for Shoreline schools did so in May. They never intended on attending SPS. The teachers' strike had absolutely nothing to do with it.
HP
Also, the teachers were on strike several weeks ago. We didn't need soup or smiles. We needed parents to be out there in red shirts with picket signs getting in the faces of central staff. Today would be a different story if we'd been in solidarity together. Teachers and parents have far more in common than parents and administrators. Too late.
That kind of sums it up.
We didn't need soup or smiles. We needed parents to be out there in red shirts with picket signs getting in the faces of central staff. Today would be a different story if we'd been in solidarity together.
Not fair and kind of ungrateful. Teachers have a union to guide them and parents have? PTA which, on these things,supporting parents at a district-wide level, is not good at it. PTA is more comfortable in legislative and fundraising roles.
It would be great if the TEACHERS now rose up to support the parents.
The staffing recommendations are primarily opportunistic staffing cuts. The cuts are deeply targeted at schools where by the creation of the "additional split grades" there would be minimal overage fees paid to the teachers.
So another words ... someone with a very sharp budget eye (and that is no-small-compliment - a very talented budget analyst did the work). Took at look at every school to examine for any possible savings.
So this is where my ongoing theme of "Who is in charge of the work of education?" comes in.
The list of savings opportunities, is just that, opportunities to save a few dollars. It is a neutral documents. It is not an education decision.
However, the majority of the items are the list would be immediately rejected by anyone who was focused on education.
The Schmitz Park example, was particularly shocking to me. Schmitz Park has been called Schmitz-mille because of the ridiculous over-crowding. They were given a full time sub at the beginning of the year with the expectation that they were going to need an additional teacher.
That school has been incredible with all of the intensity of the portables. And ... They want to
* +1 student above projection
* Do not require additional FTE due to class config
* At 26 FTEs, 2 splits and 4 class overages
So SPS is saying that at one of the most crowded schools, you should take advantage of the opportunity to save an FTE that would have been given under the funding formula, an instead have two splits and 4 class overages.
I am shocked and that does not happen often.
-No Show
Parents, your kids are valuable. You have the most to lose. Get your red shirts out of the closet, put picket signs in your hands, and become visible. There are more of you than there are of us.
BTW, I agree with Jon. There is too much money at headquarters. Somebody else said administrative staff was cut before. Why not now? Two school staff members plus for one Halfaker? Put two Halfakers together and you get five school staff people. And that's just a start. Could the board make that happen? Are these people all protected by contracts? I know teachers under contract cannot lose their jobs. They can be shifted but they must remain on the payroll.
Rare Commenter
-a reader
Briefing Staffing Adjustment (who are they briefing, I wonder?)
2015-16 WSS school budgets This file is a huge spreadsheet with many tabs. Download from Scribd in .xls format. There are many hidden columns and rows. Expand them for a better understanding.
On the "staff stds-elem 1" and "2", scroll to the bottom of each schools allocation. You will see where FTEs "above model" are listed. Yet in the Reg allocation FTEs are calculated using 26:1 for K-3 and 28:1 for 4-5.
I don't think this is a change in enrollment, it is taking back the WSS reserves. Doesn't matter if it hurts kids and places them in crowded classrooms.
Shoreline announced early last year (February?) that it had closed enrollment for out-of-district students, grades K-6. What I think may have happened is that Shoreline, and perhaps other districts, had out-of-district kids on wait lists all summer, and the wait lists were moved after school started in those districts. This could have happened during the SEA strike, but I think it was purely co-incidental. If Shoreline is like SPS, out-of-district students are the last to be let in.
There is a form that has to be filled out and sent to SPS (the resident district), and
"The transfer request is not complete until the resident school district has submitted the request to the nonresident school district, and it has
been accepted. The student remains the responsibility of the resident school district until the effective start date at the nonresident school."
Link to Choice Transfer Request Form: http://www.seattleschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/Migration/How%20do%20I/OSPI%20Seattle%20Release%20SPS%205.15.14.pdf
So, SPS should have received these forms and knew how many kids were on wait lists for out-od-district schools.
Also, just K-6 was closed in Shoreline (Shoreline elementary schools are K-6). I wonder how many transfers were accepted for grades 7-12? I've heard rumors, for instance, that some Hazel Wolf K-8 families enrolled their kids at Shorecrest HS, rather than at an SPS high school.
The upcoming elementary school boundary changes and middle school assignment changes are probably a big reason why families are fleeing to out-of-district schools. The School Board approved a total of 21 independent boundary changes for North Seattle in 2017, with chunks taken away from the attendance areas of 16 different schools and given to neighboring schools. The most-highly impacted schools are those near the Shoreline border (John Rogers, Olympic Hills, Northgate, Olympic View, Sacajawea, Broadview-Thomson, Viewlands, etc...).
Link to 2017 boundary changes:
http://sps.ss8.sharpschool.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_543/File/District/Departments/Enrollment%20Planning/Maps/growthboundary_yearbyyear/pdfs/AAChanges_2017_ES.pdf?sessionid=c28ed681579c5028aa33041f4b8d6caa
- North-end Mom
Does anybody down there really think these things out?
-wondering
Kellie, if you are right and I understand correctly, it is pretty amazing budget cutting to figure out how to cram students into split classes without needing to pay over for that. I've had large numbers of kids in my classroom before but did not get overage help because theoretically, in the building, we could have made a split grade class and reduced the numbers. (Like that would have helped; a first/second grade split with only 4 first graders in the second grade class.) Works on paper, but not in reality. I've always chosen to keep the larger class so that they kids could stay together.
Really this should be about the kids and not just mathematically moving teachers around. I know it has been said before, but if they laid off a few over-paid people at John Stanford there would be more money for mitigation. At this point, there is no pain for downtown people if the numbers are wrong. It's only the kids, families, and teachers who are feeling it. Until the district feels it, nothing is going to change.
Lousy Process
Ann Dornfeld is doing a story on this issue. If you have a child large elementary classroom and/or experiencing the loss of a teacher ...contact Ann Dornfeld.
We have some very large elementary classrooms. Do we know whether or not private prek classrooms are within these buildings?
Mirimac's Briefing Staffing Adjustment document is disturbing. Kids aren't widgets and shouldn't experience this level of disruption.
Momof2
QA Dad
The last cut in central administration was in the 70's.
The Staff have GONE OUTSIDE THE WSS to yank teachers because they could: when you have a big school like Schmitz Park, with so many sections, mashing them together, creating lots of splits, ends up being able to squeeze out a teacher and therefore save one FTE.
This, to a school trying to manage the MAJORITY of their children not in their building.
If we are so hard up for funds, then layoff the change management project management and deputy super -- layoff the really high big wigs; no kid will miss them, and total quit the whole Amplify/Beacon testing scheme, that too will save millions. SSP will keep on sailing without Charles Wright and without Amplify. How about we dump the teacher mentors too?
I will vote no on the levies, the for first time ever. Assuming it fails, I will vote yes when they bring it back 6 months later provided they can point to 10 JSCEE employees who earn $100K+ that got laid off.
WASTE NOT
I hope, Melissa, you'll watch it. I know you will be glad you did.
Re: @Ed "The last cut in central administration was in the 70's."
That is true, yes.
Back in the 1990s though Superintendent John Stanford did cut a layer of central administration, that same type of layer that has been recreated and deepened today. Under Stanford there were some central administrators (too many executive ed director - type positions for instance) who either had to return to being building administrators or were told to go back to the classroom if there were no more building admin positions.
--Baile Funk
If Kellie thinks that something is wrong, that's good enough for me.
Once again, we see the mismanagement of the district in full view. But, as someone who has watched this district, I do not believe most of those at the top are unqualified or lazy. In fact, I think they are smart and know very well what they are doing. I hope to get to a more thorough analysis soon but I'll try to break it down here in brief.
1) Nothing is ever as it seems in this district. Could there be multiple motives/agendas for what staff is doing? Yes. But they will just say they are running a crowded, underfunded district that is still picking up the pieces from a terrible recession in many old buildings. They believe that data is king and parents are basically fundraisers.
One agenda I believe that is in play are a couple of senior staff and outside players trying to take over the district. What better way than to have disgruntled parents, overcrowded classrooms and under-resourced schools? That should NOT stop any parent from rising up.
But knowing what all the cards on the table are is useful.
2) But senior staff have some major problems, some of their doing and some from management teams past. They can't dance away from these problems and are trying to keep most of them on the downlow and divert attention.
I am shocked and that does not happen often."
yeah Kellie splits and overages have been the norm at HCC/APP ES
bleaaahhh what a nightmare Admin has become...
reader47
For the last three years total enrollment has been OVER projected by about 300 students, which was the cause of the October shuffling for the last three years.
So this year, instead of being 300 over, they are now 675 over.
There is a basic flaw in the projection methodology that I have been explaining for years. The same flaw that caused the UNDER projection for so many years is the same issue that is causing the OVER projection.
I am not surprised at all that projection would be over this year. When schools are in survival mode for multiple years, people that would typically have been in public schools begin to make other choices. This pattern has been very clear for over a decade. Once a school becomes "saturated" people make other choices.
In other words, there is a point where a school gets so crowded that people leave the system.
So another answer to the 675 over projections is
* the same 300 over projection, that has been true for three years
* An additional 375 over projection, due to over crowding, and instability around the opening of new schools, bell times and boundary changes, etc.
Splits and overages are "normal" as in statistically normal, in that many if not most elementary buildings (state-wide) have at least one split class or one overage.
As funding is granted on student:teacher ratio and students do not come in nice neat little packages, every building has the challenge of how to divide up resources. As most teachers and families HATE split classes, for a wide variety of reasons, buildings try to do everything they can to minimize the number of split classes
At many buildings, the BLT has made the decision that in order to avoid split classes, they will over-load one grade and thereby under-load a different grade. For example, to avoid a 2/3 spit, schools will have 3 larger than typical 3rd grade classes and 4 smaller than typical 2nd grade classes.
What is problematic about this round of budget cuts is that ....
* It is one thing when a building decides that they will overload a grade and underload a grade to avoid splits. The cost / benefit is clear and transparent and typically well communicated to staff and families. It is an intentional decision.
* It is another thing, when a school, uses its budget allocation to optimize one thing and then the district comes back and says ... because of the decision that the building made to avoid splits, we can now ask you to ADD a split class and remove FTE.
All of the schools that are listed as "pull due to class configuration" are schools, that are now receiving fewer FTE that the WSS ensures BECAUSE of how the building configured the teachers and classrooms. In the second case, there is no benefit. You now have the split class you tried to avoid AND all of the classes are at max or overload. Here are just a few examples:
Alki - +10 students above projection, pull due to class config
Beacon Hill - 1 students below projection, pull due to class config
Wedgwood - +16 students above projection, pull due to class config
If Tolley is still employed by the end of the month, march on JSCEE and demand his head. Seriously, people need to start losing their jobs at SPS over this stuff. Otherwise it will just keep happening.
Manpower Consultancy in Bangalore