Get Schooled

By MPH

September 3, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this

Let’s start with the superintendent’s car.

By Elsie

September 3, 2008 5:19 PM | Link to this

Here’s a better question: how long have they been paying for at least 189 central office employees that they obviously don’t need?

By SallyB

September 3, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

Years and years ago, Dekalb offered TEACHERS this deal. I think it was actually a larger percentage of salary, though. The county office personnel NEEDS TO BE CUT..BIG TIME!!!! If this is what it takes, so be it. AS to your question, I am guessing it will NOT be more county office stuff, but other stuff.

By Petruchio

September 3, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

I wish other counties would consider cutting central office staff. Our superintendent has been quoted several times in our local paper saying that he would increase class size to help ease budget woes. I think all cuts should be ones that don’t directly affect the students. For example: Moving expenses for a few newly hired principals, travel expenses for a principal to travel back and forth to his school, new frivoluous central office positions with creative titles, and the latest curriculum du jour and the training. The public needs to be more aware of the kinds of things that school systems spend money on. Not many will go to the central office and request to see an expenditure report, but many might pull one up on the internet. School systems need some kind of accountability.

By jim d

September 3, 2008 6:46 PM | Link to this

Well,

I’m aware of one county that could have reduced spending.

The rhetoric was that we put our money in the classroom and valued teachers above all others. Yet when enrollment increased by 5 percent per year between 2001 and 2006 non-school-based positions increased by 7 percent per year. Not to mention that ver the same period, average teacher salaries increased at a rate of 2 percent per year and average non-school-based salaries increased at a rate of 9 percent per year.

The county’s line was that it had the best technology at the best-possible price. That sounds good, but they were spending anywhere from $20 to $50 million every year with one single technology company, all without any form of public bidding.They spent way over $50 million with that same company for implementing a new system (PeopleSoft), when that same company orignally estimate the total cost to be just over $27 million.

There is an old adage that actions speak louder than words. How do these actions speak to you? Never, in all of my 60 years, have I seen a school district do so little with so much (money) in the area of technology.

Folks these are actual facts that can be documented in the GCPS’s records. Yet we sheeple keep voting these same liars back into office. Does anyone other than me see something wrong with this picture?

By Lee

September 3, 2008 7:45 PM | Link to this

From the Dekalb school system website:

“In FY2009, approximately $32.9 million in reductions are planned in the budget. Approximately $19.1 million is a direct result of overall staffing reductions. In the upcoming General Operations budget, approximately 91.2% of the total planned expenditures come in the form of salaries and benefits. Central office positions will be reduced by 40 at a cost savings of approximately $2.6 million. This reduction will condense the central office staff for FY2009 back to the FY2007 level. Also, the number of central office staff members will be approximately the same as where it was in the fiscal year 2004.”

Or, put another way, even during periods of declining enrollment, this government school has been steadily increasing it’s central office bureacratic staff. This is the nature (and fatal flaw) of government - they will ALWAYS find a way to spend money.

What they should have done is reduce the size of the central office by attrition.

The superintendent car deal is a window into the mind of the top manager of the system. He bought his former county furnished car at surplus for about 1/3 of the true value. In my line of work (auditing/accounting), we call that FRAUD and he and the person who priced the car should be terminated.

But hey, it’s only taxpayer money. Right???

By Lisa B.

September 3, 2008 8:17 PM | Link to this

I agree that the cuts should not hurt the students. I think many of the expensive mandates derived from No Child Left Behind could be cut without anyone even noticing. All this testing, (writing tests, throwing out tests, rewriting tests)and paperwork cost loads of money. In the years since No Child Left Behind has been implemented, norm-referenced national test scores have barely improved, if at all. What a waste of money and manpower. Get rid of it.

By TheBlogger

September 4, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

Sure. That will certainly help ‘failing’ schools that don’t make AYP. Get rid of the most experienced teachers. Sure. That’ll help.

Rather than the top management hacking at the teachers, how about getting rid of the top management. Firing one of two of them should save hundreds of thousands of dollars. That would pay for many teachers.

Oh yeah - wait a minute - this is education and using logic isn’t allowed.

By catlady

September 4, 2008 7:06 PM | Link to this

Reduce the salaries of the CO staff in half or put them back in the classroom at regular classroom rates. Let teachers who HAVE served the kids (as opposed to administration) for 30 years opt out.

Stuff like this continues the drop in morale for teachers. These CO folks are so hot; let them teach for a while, or retire on their own. Give them some of the toughest students since they know enough to tell the classroom teacher what to do.

You’d see who are really educators rather than in it for the easy money if you put those same staff back into the hard to fill slots in the classroom.

I see NO POINT in giving them 30% of salary. Let them teach, or retire like everyone else. This is disgusting.

By From both sides

September 6, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this

I’m confused. Some of these posts sound like you think this article is about forcing out veteran teachers (which may indeed be the next step), but what I read is that CO staff is being reduced (hallellujah!)

As Elsie suggested, the burning question is why these cuts weren’t made before cuts to instruction.

“22 of the 189 jobs targeted for the offer involve direct services to students and may have to be refilled. The others may be eliminated completely.

How much has DCSS paid to people in useless positions, which probably meant hiring even more support staff for the useless positions? If, as mentioned before, these jobs had been eliminated incrementally as enrollment dropped - or never been created in the first place…But of course, the CO is where you send the school administrators who are incompetent, so apparently DCSS has had an abundant crop of those the past few years…

By Time for Ed Change

September 6, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

This budget situation is looming large in south Georgia. One school system has already announced that they will only be paying for long-term subs. They will “maximize” class size and the teachers who have open periods after their students are redistributed will serve as subs those periods. Teachers are also apparently only due a 30-minute planning period per day so they may be expected to cover classes in their “extra” planning time. Theoretically “every certified” person in the county will be expected to contribute to the effort. My best friend teaches in this system and the teachers are just waiting for the superintendent to show up to cover a class Monday morning. (They’ve also called a mandatory system-wide meeting for Monday after school to discuss further budget cuts.)

This school system of 8000 students has, at the CO, 3 Assistant Superintendents and 16 Directors. These include a Director of Standards Based Learning, a Director of Assessment & Accountability, a School Improvement Specialist, and a Professional Learning Coordinator. They have both a Comptroller and a Finance Director, also there’s an Asst Sup of Special Services with Directors of Special Ed, Social Services, Instructional Support Programs, and Family Connection.

For a middle school population of around 1800, the administrative team consists of a director, an assistant director, and both a principal and an asst. principal for each grade. (For comparison, Trickum MS in Gwinnett has 1882 students and has one principal and an asst principal for each grade and one for special ed.)

Sadly enough, if and when such districts cut back on administrative positions, it won’t always be the people who are least effective who’ll be leaving… maybe the consulting firms who are recommending changes should also be asked to objectively assess what personnel should be retained as well as which positions. (See other posts about daughters and wives being hired…)