Get Schooled

By 5th yr in HELL

May 14, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

The neighborhood’s already dead, they’re just waiting on the final bodies to decompose. Regentrification is what is fueling this. The traditionally black schools in Atlanta will be flipped into white schools within the next few years. It’s the communities fault, when you don’t value education you won’t be able to afford the housing. Economics segregation at it’s finest!

By teach1

May 14, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this

It stuns me to think that something cannot be done with these school. I do not believe any school is too small. Of course, I am sitting in an elementary school of 1100 with no help in site until fall of 2009!

By HS Teacher Too

May 14, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

That’s a good question. I don’t know how schools are run — is each school expected to be economically “self-sufficient”? Obviously a private school must be, and I believe a charter school must be — but I have absolutely no idea how a county-based system works. For example, might it be that the tax (etc.) money that the school gets can’t meet the expenses the school incurs, if that particular school has a high percentage of special needs kids but the county as a whole has the funds to underwrite the deficit?

Hopefully there are some bloggers who are more informed about this subject than I am; it will be interesting to learn how it works.

That being said, I think a school is probably too small and ought to close when it grossly can’t meet its expenses.

By JustMe

May 14, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

There is an economic value to large size. No explanation needed.

The question is how small is too small. The real question is how much “extra” money should be spent to support a very small school.

Remember, increase in spending for small schools mean that your property taxes will increases - the question then becomes: is it worth it?

By Tony

May 14, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this

When funding schools it is very important to look at school size in order to allow the school to function economically. School funding is based on enrollment. You have to have certain numbers of teachers to meet the needs of the enrolled students. Each school must have a media center in order to meet accreditation standards. There should be a secretary (or two) and a principal. There have to be custodians or a cleaning service. There is the food service department, too. The funding for schools balances at different enrollment levels based on the grades served by the school. Too many students within one school tips the efficiency the wrong way just like too few students does. Since we operate public schools with tax money, it is imperative that we work to meet the needs of the public and conserve the resources.

In short, yes. Schools should be closed when enrollment is too low to support the school financially. School buildings can be maintained and reopened when the population increases again.

By jim d

May 14, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this

Hey, if the parents were that concerned they could apply for a charter. Time for the parents to get off their duffs and do something!

So close the damn thing already unless parents want to take the bull by the horns. THEY don’t have to allow it to just fade away!!THEY can restructure it as a CHARTER!!

By DB

May 14, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this

With so many other schools complaining of overcrowding, I can’t believe redrawing the lines wouldn’t increase enrollment. Or perhaps it could be converted to a special-needs school, perhaps for academically-challenged kids, or a special-use campus for technology, arts, etc.

130 seems pretty darn small for 6, 7, and 8 grade — that’s a little over 40 kids per class. While it’s true that private schools may have similar-sized classes, there’s usually more than 3 grades at a private school.

I’m not sure I go along with the idea that a school should be TOTALLY self-sufficient — after all, that’s why school funds are pooled and then redistributed throughout a school system, to make sure everyone has access to education. But realistically, there has to be some point where the school board does the math and then says, “Sorry, it doesn’t make economic sense to continue supporting this school.”

By Ernest

May 14, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

Stakeholders should answer this question with their willingness to pay for smaller schools. I think an enrollment of 400 is the magic number in which the state will help with providing funding for.

City of Decatur is a good example of a local school system where stakeholders are willing to pay higher property taxes for smaller schools. Those residents can point to favorable test scores as a justification for what they pay.

DeKalb County School System (DCSS) just went through a very public discussion of its budget. Small, neighborhood schools was the philosophy of DCSS for many years. As a result, it has the largest inventory of schools in the state although it has 2/3 the students that Gwinnett has. This adds additional labor along with maintenance and operations costs to the overall budget.

DCSS recently consolidated and repurposed several low enrollment elementary schools. This was met with outrage in parts of the county. If the governor signs legislation eliminating the ‘birthday tax’, DCSS would lose over 32 million dollars for its FY10 budget. Further consolidation will probably be accelerated if that happens unless the taxpayers collectively agree to pay more.

At the end of the day, we will get what we are willing to pay for.

By JustMe

May 14, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this

Ernest - Right. Gwinnett has saved money by economizing and leveraging super large schools. DeKalb took the opposite approach towards smaller schools and are paying for it economically (budget woes).

This results in DeKalb likely increasing property taxes while Gwinnett won’t have to (as much anyway).

Who is right? Who knows for sure.

By MiltonMan

May 14, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Close all schools in Atlanta. $10K to “educate” a ATL student & we get in return some of the lowest test scores around.

By Attn: Clayton Parents

May 14, 2008 5:47 PM | Link to this

Would Cynthia Tucker care to explain how John Trotter and MACE are THE problem with CCPS when, ever since the last election cycle, the majority voting bloc has been comprised of members of GAE?

Would she care to explain how MACE is THE problem when not a single ClayCo administrator is a MACE member? (But one of GAE’s Board of Directors and the GAE President are administrators…you know the ones who RUN the system.)

Tucker won’t explain the above because she CAN’T explain the above, because it doesn’t fit her narrow minded liberal agenda.

Maybe THAT is why she has consistently refused any and all calls to debate Dr. Trotter in a open, formal debate.

If you are THAT sure Dr. Trotter is the problem, and you “really care” about what happens in ClayCo, why not educate the voters with an open, formal debate with Dr. Trotter?

By Lee

May 14, 2008 7:53 PM | Link to this

Here’s another consideration:

If you vacate an older school building and it sits empty for over one year, you have to bring it up to the most recent building codes and state / federal school standards in order to re-open it. A lot of these older buildings do not comply with all the standards. As a result, it becomes an expensive proposition to reoccupy an older, vacant school building. Sometimes, it is more economical to build a new school rather than remodel the old one.

Sorta stupid, I know. But remember, we’re desling with the government here…

By catlady

May 14, 2008 8:25 PM | Link to this

There probably IS an optimal number for an elementary school and middle school, on the bottom end. However, so many sytems routinely exceed the maximum number of students for the best outcomes, sometimes by 2-300%! Research shows for at risk students the smaller, more personalized the school size, for academic achievement, drug and pregnancy reduction, etc, the better. I am guessing many of the students from these schools fit the definition of at-risk to the nth degree. Now, if the question is, can they field a middle school football team, the answer is probably NO. If the question is, is the cost worth the higher test scores, lower pregnancy and drug use rates, etc, well, I don’t know what the taxpayers will say. Most of them do not have children who would go to those schools, so for them it may not be worth it. As for me, I hope smaller schools are the wave of the future. I’d rather pay on the front end than through the rear end.

By catlady

May 14, 2008 8:34 PM | Link to this

True story: around 1970 the state decided it was not going to pay for the upkeep of the little country schools in our county. They would have to be consolidated. While many of the schools meekly consolidated, the one in our area (about 200 kids, 1st-7th grade) did not. The parents said “H3ll no. We will do it oursleves”. So the PARENTS came in and painted and fixed the roof and made it clear that they were not only very unhappy, but willing to put sweat equity into the school. The state eventually backed down, and the school continues today, K-5 with over 300 students. Students from that school are disproportionately represented in the honor graduates from the local high school, and have disproportionately fewer dropouts and “premature” births.

Now, do the parents of these two schools feel strongly enough not to just sit and gripe, but strongly enough to work and petition for an exception? I don’t know. In the world we live in now, I do not know if it is even possible. I just know what has happened where I live.

By catlady

May 14, 2008 8:40 PM | Link to this

One more thing: the students from the area are NOT the rich kids in the county. What do they have going for them? How do you explain their much higher test scores? Their parents have an INVESTMENT in the school. It is small enough that many parents feel they can have some say in its direction. There is a history behind the school. It is a COMMUNITY school in the truest sense of the word. We would do better to have more of them.

By DB

May 15, 2008 7:30 AM | Link to this

Just did a quick check at GPPF at the 2007 school rankings. NONE of the Decatur elementary schools ranked in the top 100 of schools in the state. The highest ranked school in the City was 209 (although it is true that all three elementary schools in the City are in the top 300 of schools, state-wide). By contrast, Gwinnett County had 9 and DeKalb County had 4. Fulton County had 16 (4 in the top 10), and Cobb had 12 (2 in the top 10).

By jim d

May 15, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this

JM,

this one is really off topic and i know how you feel about my providing links but I respectfully suggest you may wish to open these and do a bit of reading. Please keep an open mind and HAGD.

Link 1

Link 2 note the ist page on this one is blank and you will need to scroll down.

By jim d

May 15, 2008 8:15 AM | Link to this

DB,

Did you notice that the 3 in fulton that are ranked in the top 15 were all located in NORTH Fulton? ( not exactly slums ya know.)

By DB

May 15, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

jim d, yes, I noticed. :-) All of these schools, though, are really interesting snapshots of the socio-economic pockets surrounding the school. For example, just in North Fulton alone, Woodland Elementary, is ranked 194th. 2-1/2 miles down the same road and around a corner is Spalding Drive Elementary, which is ranked 419. Spalding Drive tends to gather students from the Roswell Road apartment housing corridor, while Woodland Elementary generally pulls theirs from an area where homes are averaging $500,000. Someone trying to choose housing based on school performance would be forced to pin-point their areas of interest with a great deal of exactitude.

One has to also concede that, among the top 110 schools, there’s not a huge difference in achievement scores — they range from 97 to 100. Indeed, the achievement scores don’t dip below 90 until you hit 497 or so (out of 1176 — hapless Sky Haven Elementary in DeKalb has the dubious honor of being last on the list, with a score of 47.)

By jim d

May 15, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

AH yes DB—Discrimination thru attendance zones. A tricky proposition at best but one that works rather well.

We are about to see the same happen in an area of North Gwinnett when they open a new school in the 09-10 school year. The existing school will sky rocket into the top 100 nationally while the new school will struggle to ever make into the top 5000 nationally.