R Johnson said...
With regard to the SD Unified budget deficit, of course the 800lb elephant in the room is the busing program. That comment comes as no surprise to anyone that actually takes a few months to think the pros and cons of the busing program through. A few questions are in order. How much does the busing program cost us in total? Ans: Way too much, but it will never be publicly disclosed in the budget. Estimates are at $10M per year. What are the results of the program? Ans: Poor Numbers approaching 60% of kids bused to a school outside his or her district go on to fail the state high school exit exam. What's the cost to all the other kids in the district not receiving this expensivie perk? Ans: Unknown, but it's heavy... no summer school, deferred maintenance all over, not enough books, and so forth. What are the benefits of transporting an estimated 10,000 kids (this number isn't available either)around the city everyday? Ans: It's probably helpful to a small percentage of kids that realy want to buckle down and learn. However if the buses stopped running tomorrow nearly all of those kids would figure out a way to get to their chosen school by their own means. The rest to make a pun who are "just along for the ride" should not be receiving this public benefit anyway. School Busing has been a SD Unified program for 35 years. Did it raise standards or graduation rates? Ans: Never measured, but it's a protected idea of district administrators whose time has come for an honest review of cost vs. benefit in light of program cuts district wide. Is SD Unified under some type of court order to ship kids all over the city? Ans: No. If it were, it's time to go visit the judge because what we have is not benefiting the 10,000 kids receiving the benefit nearly enough to justify the costs borne by the 125,000 students who are not. Maybe the kid "just along for the ride" truly benefits from the program and keeps society from bearing the costs of another failed student among us? Ans: It's 30-45 minutes each way from Southeast San Diego to Scripps Ranch High. That kid could be home studying for the extra hour per day he or she wastes on the bus at the expense of all the other 135,000 kids in the district. Is it time to completely re-think the program? Ans: Left blank intentionally. Maybe there are a whole of good reasons to keep the program for another 35 years? Ans: If there are, they are subtle.
Posted on 10/21/2009
Lynn Goodner said...
Instead of letting people go, why can't we look at changes to the benefits? If employees had to pay a portion of their benefits or a little higher copays, I'm sure that would save the district funds. The unions need to look at this as well as I know they fight for the benefits and we still all need them but it's better than people losing their jobs.
Posted on 10/21/2009
D. Glanz said...
Close elementary schools that cannot sustain enrollment levels of greater than 300. If our pupil counts are decreasing, then so must the number of schools. It is expensive to run an entire school with less then 300 students, yet we continue to keep these schools open. If you look at how many actual neighborhood students attend these schools there is even less need for some of these schools. Precious resources are wasted busing students to these schools just to sustain them. If the demographics of the area don't support an elementary school, then the school should be closed. This is difficult for parents who want their children to attend a school within walking distance, but neighborhoods change over time, particularly, Ocean Beach, Pacific Beach, and Clairemont. Busing students from another neighborhood just to keep the school open isn't the best use of resources. We need quality schools in areas were students live. Parent involvement is higher when students attend schools where they live. As the gentlemen stated in the earlier post, if it isn't improving student achievement, then there isn't justification for the program. Many of these small elementary schools get over-formula teachers because it is difficult to make the class size numbers work out due to the small numbers of students in each grade level: Below is the listing of small elementary schools and the number of regular education teachers they qualify for: Barnard (9), Bay View Terrace (9), Cabrillo (8), Cubberely (9), Crown Point (9), Cadman (6), Franklin (9), Rolando Park (7). Contrast this with a school that have as many as 46 teachers. Many of these small schools are in neighborhoods with other small schools within blocks of each other. One could be closed and the remaining schools would benefit from the additional enrollment. For Example: Cadman Elementary is near to Alcott, Whitman, and Tolar. Students could easily go to one of these other schools. Many parents in other areas take there children much farther to attend school. School Board Members: Please consider closing some elementary schools.
Posted on 10/21/2009
Adam Grofcsik said...
I am writing to oppose any cuts to the GATE Seminar program. Reason: Our children are our garden. During times of drought, we humans, should pay special attention to those individuals that offer the best hope for our future nourishment.
Posted on 10/22/2009
O.Florez said...
I know that we could have the programs we need for our children and save jobs by having a District Wide implementation. For example by saving on all materials/supplies and having control on what it is being spent. We could save extra dollars on what the money is being spent on. I believe that many of us spend and waste alot of materials and maybe spend on things that don't need to be bought. We could trim alot on ALL of the spending. I do agree that we could save money and time by sending our kids to their neighborhood school. I also suggest that we stop building new schools that we do not need. We should utilize the schools and services that we already have and not incur other expenses. I think we should have the medical coverage for one employee and one family member and then have the employee pay part of the benefits for any additional family members.This is my opinion.
Posted on 10/22/2009
Susan Legler said...
1. San Diego Unified could cut some monies from its excessive costs by requiring parents to pay for bus service - especially for those choosing schools outside of their area - and by requiring students to pay the full cost of 6th grade camp. Although I work for the district, my own children have attended schools in East County, where I have always had to pay for bus service and 6th grade camp. How is it that SDUSD is compelled to provide these services for free, if other districts charge parents for costs? 2. Eliminate multiple administrative positions at the secondary level, by replacing Vice-Principals in charge of disciplinary issues with Dean positions at the lower teacher salaries. 3. Provide medical benefits on a per-family basis, eliminating the double benefits to married couples where both parties work for the district. 4. Salary: I would not agree with a pay decrease, including furloughs that would decrease pay. Teacher salaries are not unreasonably low, however, living in San Diego is expensive, and many teachers must work two jobs just to pay basic living expenses (not to mention the money they pay for classroom rewards, manipulatives, & decor). In addition, the requirements to become a teacher (education, tests, training, costs) are so extensive, that salaries should be higher to compete with equally demanding professions in the private sector.
Posted on 10/22/2009
Sara Finegan said...
Cut the Balboa Park program. Kids who return from it have no memory of what they were supposed to have learned; the activities are only nominally tied to the alleged curriculum. Sixth Grade Camp is terrific, but if we can only keep one OCILE program, I vote for Old Town, which is an amazing learning experience for all kids. If you must close schools, close the schools that are performing poorly. It's not so much about size as eliminating what isn't working. A small elementary school that is raising scores and has an active community surrounding it should be favored over one which has not consistently shown growth. Cut staff at Normal Street and other administrative zones before you cut teachers. Teaching is what school districts are all about. We can all live with less bureaucracy. What we might think is a necessity probably can be eliminated with less pain than cutting teachers. Cut all of the area/regional/cluster leaders. Good God, how many times do we need to reconfigure these things? how much good do they truly accomplish? they are most certainly not worth the money, as schools don't really benefit at all. If you want to reduce salaries, reduce principal salaries. Times are tough. Give them a lower base with the promise of a small bonus if goals are met. I have no problem with Kaiser being the generic health insurance and teachers having to pay extra to keep Pacificare or whatever else they prefer. And if you haven't eliminated double insurance for two spouses employed by the district, go for it. I have no idea why you have been paying twice for me and my spouse to be insured all of these years. Eliminate all but the most essential consultants. Eliminate conferences. Cut the superintendant's pay and staff. Do not under any circumstances negotiate a superintendent's contract that gives him/her money if the contract is breached. Consider hiring from within. You cannot, I think, eliminate more busing. Special ed busing is necessary, though probably a good 1/2 of the kids who are on the sp. ed bus could be walking. VEEP buses are gone.
Posted on 10/22/2009
K. Wester said...
I don’t what is spent on the Best Doctors program, but I feel it is a waste of money. I have utilized it and found it to be extremely generic. The intake person makes you feel special, but what I ended up getting back was nothing more that some information that could be looked up on the internet. You would get better advice by requesting a second opinion from a doctor in your insurance group. I suggest we cancel it.
Posted on 10/23/2009
R Johnson said...
Can someone explain why our schools have nurses and in some cases even assitants to the nurses? In the era before cell phones a sick kid went to the nurse so the nurse could call his parnet for pickup. All kids have phones of their own now. From what I have observed all that our nurses do at the high schools is hand out blue cards authorizing partial day absences for trips to the doctor or dentist. That's attendence and not nursing and requires no special training. What else do they do all day long?
Posted on 10/23/2009
Katie Anderson said...
Instead of SDUSD paying the military to have JROTC on our campuses, SDUSD should be getting paid by the military to allow access to our students. If not at a profit, then the military should be paying at minimum the costs of the program, but we should absolutely NOT be paying the military from funds that are meant to educate all children.
Posted on 10/23/2009
L. PARK said...
If furloughs are put in place, I'm hoping employees will have the option of taking the un-paid time off over the entire school year. Easier to manage financially than having to take off all at once, or over a short period of time. Perhaps 1/2 a day a month, for 8 months? Or 1 day every other month (or two)? Could be required to complete the 4-days by May. For employees who only receive the one paycheck once a month, this could be vital.
Posted on 10/23/2009
Stephen said...
One idea would be to look at ways to INCREASE REVENUE through grants, non-state sources of funding, etc. This might help offset some of the cuts. The next thing I would do is to go back to one set of administration in the "small schools" campuses like San Diego High, Crawford, Kearny, etc. We could keep the same tracks and electives but one principal and admin teams. Next, I would consider shortening the number of games by one in each sport. Next, I would eliminate the STAR test. Lastly, I would go to "cold lunches" one day a week. I agree with another poster on eliminating busing and encouraging children to go their neighborhood schools. I would also look at closing down some schools with low enrollment.
Posted on 10/24/2009
Antonio said...
SDUSD needs to reconfigure itself. The district is too big and the needs are bigger for our San Diego students. Line up elementary, middle schools and high schools into three smaller sections to the unified school district east of the 805, west of the 805 and west of the 5. Don't hire another superintendent but use the area superintendents to take charge of the smaller reconfigured sections to this unified school district. Lower the number of v.p.'s at middle schools that are doing well academically and have administration use their certification to get back in the classroom and teach to keep classroom numbers lower. Stop having so many administration meetings, use the vast technology available at our district to keep admin on school site or have telecommunication conferences in the afternoon so it does not keep administration from the important role of supporting the classrooms and teaching in the classroom themselves. Support academic electives that have proven necessary and work for our students. Busing program needs rethinking, gentleman who posted above is right, busing budget needs disclosure.
Posted on 10/24/2009
krodger said...
Consider another early retirement offer which might interest just enough employees who were just a year short for the offer last year to make sense. A survey could go out to get an idea of how many would take the offer. Seems unusual to offer it so soon but times are tight. Worth looking into.
Posted on 10/25/2009
krodger said...
SUMMER SCHOOL PRINCIPALS Summer school sessions have been cut back substantially, possibly totally next summer. The number of principals needed for summer school is far fewer than in the past. However, we still employ principals to work in the summer. If it is a contract issue that they are paid for 11 months, perhaps we need to revisit the contract. On the other hand, I know several principals who would choose to stay home with their families and take less pay by not working summer school, if they were give the choice. Principals,however, are not give that option. They must work. We could employ only enough principals to cover the limited summer schools. I worked at a summer school with 7 teachers and we had 3 principals on site! This is a waste of valuable resources. Could we please take a look at this issue?
Posted on 10/25/2009
D. Glanz - Parent said...
Year Round (YR) schools need to be on the same track as our traditional schools. There would be an initial cost of converting schools from YR to traditional, but in the long run, we would save money. Year round schools cost SDUSD extra money since they do not end their year until the beginning of the next FISCAL year. Thus the district has to absorb the cost of the two weeks for any counselors, nurses, VP's, and classified, whose positions were being cut due to lower enrollment projected in the new FISCAL year. In addition, if an employee transfers to a traditional site, or if a position is grant funded but the funding ends on June 30th then the cost is charged to the district to keep the employee the extra weeks in July. Plus, when an employee transfers from a traditional to a YR school, and doesn't start until September, the employee has to "make up" the time on the breaks - which usually means they aren't working with students, but rather doing administrative work. Parents who have students in year round and other students in traditional track have difficulty scheduling vacations, babysitting and family times. If something isn't good for families, then it isn't good for education. Please take a look at the performance of the year round schools and make a decision based on their performance. If the data doesn't support keeping the program, then cut it! PS. I agree with the previous blogger about cutting OCILE for 6th graders. I have three SDUSD children who all didn't get much out of the program. The original science curriculum from the 60's is gone, replaced with diversity training. Diversity is best taught through day to day interaction with classmates, sports, and doing project based instruction within the classroom.
Posted on 10/26/2009
Jcarvajal said...
District could save a great deal if we extended the school year by 22, or so, school days. This could be done by: 1=creating a total district school calendar 2=eliminating summer school and intersession school. Savings of not having separate curriculum, staffing, paperwork, busing schedules, etc. for summer school. 3=Student achievement would increase due to extended same teacher instruction.
Posted on 10/26/2009
Daniel said...
Speaking only from my observations at the HS level as a parent and Substitute teacher at many of our schools, I can say that the bussing issue has greater negative impacts than positive. Why? Well here are some examples: 1. You eliminate the "community" aspect when you take kids out of their neighborhoods and bus them 15 miles from home. Kids have no affiliation with the school. 2. You increase the gang violence in schools by mixing-in kids from different neighborhoods. You actually think that kids from the South East actually getting along with kids at City Heights? 3. You don't hold the schools accountable for improving their academic status. Instead you move some students, but maintain substandard structure at the school. Regarding the comments that one poster had about JROTC, she is completely misinformed. My son has been in JROTC at Mira Mesa for three years and I know that their JROTC books, uniforms, supplies, equipment and 50% of their teacher's salaries are paid by the military. In my opinion, you are already getting some great benefits for a very small financial contribution. In closing, here are my suggestions: 1. elimination of bussing, or cost gets paid by parents that choose that option. A drastic savings. 2. Eliminate the Balboa Park program. This is a no-brainer. 3. Increase medical/dental co-pay, teachers already have a very good benefit package. 4. Restructure your "Academy" schools like Kearny, SDHS and Crawford back into standard high schools. Their 4-school structure has not reaped-in any benefits and it could be argued that the initiative is a complete failure. In addition, they are severely top-loaded with multiple Administrators (Principals, VP's and admin).
Posted on 10/26/2009
Arnie said...
I concur with "Krodger", another look at the Golden Handshake might be beneficial. Some of the more senior employees might reconsider retiring with the threat of larger class sizes, payroll reductions, etc. Regarding class size, you have already taken the scientific approach, and everyone knows smaller class sizes achieves higher performance levels. If it’s not broken, don’t fix it. Give the children a solid educational foundation early in their career. All these fluctuations with the size of classes will have an affect later on in the child’s educational development. This means more problems for the SDISD in later years. If the child doesn’t pick up on the basics early in his career, you are going to be doomed to readdress the lack of basics later in his/her career. The child should be your main objective.
Posted on 10/26/2009
B Burdette said...
I agree with closing small schools under 300 students, there are a number of elementary schools that have very small student enrollment and have other elementary schools close by--they need to consolidate and eliminate the cost of keeping so many schools open. Make parents pay for busing---At some schools 60% of the kids are bused in, that makes no sense at all. Please DO NOT eliminate OCILE, this is a tremendous program that offers to much for so many and the cost savings does not support eliminating it! Also in favor of reconfiguring district into smaller districts that could be run more efficiently
Posted on 10/26/2009
DBralla said...
When is someone going to look at the processes performed in our school offices? We have very qualified personnel performing tasks that are time consuming and should be automated. One of the most unproductive and costly processes is the annual registration packet fiasco that happens in every school. Forms and flyers are copied for each student, collated and either mailed home or delivered to students to take home. In elementary, these packets are known as “first day packets”. The packets contain some required information and some not required. Then after all these packets are distributed, this wonderful booklet “Facts for Parents” shows up and is supposed be distributed. This booklet contains several of the forms that were already copied and sent home in the registration packet. For instance; the Zero Tolerance Form, Student Connect Responsibility and the Photo/Media Release Contract. Most schools never distribute the “Fact for Parents” to the entire population and they end up in the trash. If this booklet is going to be issued, it needs to include all the forms required for registration except the Enrollment Card. It also needs to be available in May not August. Coronado School District has the entire process for registration online and has for several years. Another way to save money would be to utilize the applications that are available on ZANGLE. The current version of ZANGLE includes an application to track lockers, however, very few use it. ZANGLE includes an application for passes called a “Summons”. This application not only produces a pass for any number of students but supplies the classroom # and teacher name and can be sorted for ease of distribution. This eliminates many hours of looking up student records. ZANGLE includes an application for tracking the forms returned/not returned from the registration packets. Many schools create EXCEL files to track this information or do it by hand. ZANGLE appears to have an application for ASB funds; SDUSD has a contract with “Blue Bear” for this application. Let’s Work Smarter; Not harder. Let’s use the tools we have on hand and stop purchasing outside applications to supplement our lack of knowledge of a system for which we paid an incredible amount of money.
Posted on 10/26/2009
c_ham said...
I think that the transportation program needs to be closely evaluated. On the one hand, I think providing school options outside of one's neighborhood is an important one, but in the current budgetary climate needs to be reexamined. Since it is an empirical question, the potential amount saved should be relatively easily calculated. Perhaps this isn't cut entirely, but closer school choices can be made. This is an 82 million dollar issue, per page 286 of the Budget Book. Less time traveling, longer sleep periods, closer to home, are all potential benefits. A $20 million dollar issue is instructional materials. I am sure this issue has already been examined, but I think it is critically important that we do whatever is necessary to maintain reasonable teacher:student ratios. If we hit 29.5:1 in elementary school, our kids have very little chance of success. Renegotiate textbooks and other related costs. Move to on-line learning. In short, it is my opinion that for our kids to have a chance at education, we have to continue to make difficult choices to maintain a decent teacher:student ratio or else many families will be looking at their educational options, further reducing enrollment in SDUSD. Since I am writing, I also think that breaking the school district into more manageable parts (perhaps 3 smaller districts) should be considered. Whether this would indeed result in cost savings is another issue, as there may have to be duplicate administration. However, there may be greater oversight of the budget, and surprise over-runs (as with the 16 million dollars this year) may be more easily avoided. The amount of items on the Board's agenda is overwhelming, and it is no wonder problems happen. I am curious to find out whether the Board itself feels that it is able to handle the workload it needs to handle, and if each decision is given the attention it deserves? A sample from a recent Board meeting goes from facility management to special education services, hiring fiscal consultants. Once contracts are signed, what kind of oversight and accountability of billing ensures? Are we sure our tax dollars are used wisely and efficiently?
Posted on 10/26/2009
J.Groff said...
We need to consider that providing medical/dental coverage for the employee plus their entire family is not a fiscally sound idea. Providing coverage for the employee and maybe + 1 makes more sense. Since we (teachers) have been working without a contract since July 2008, this should be considered for the new contract. I prefer this over taking a pay cut or furlough.
Posted on 10/27/2009
mcarmela said...
I've lived in the Clairemont area for 10 years and have noticed the kids in the neighborhood have all grown, moved on to high school or are in College. The area around Lafayette & Sequoia is now filled with empty nesters or about to be. The elementary age kids have certainly declined. The need for 2 elementaries within blocks of each other is unnecessary. The plan to join the 2 schools last year was an excellent idea that would have saved money. Parents rallied together without dealing with the painful reality that if they kept the school open one more year what would the outcome be in the long run. Well, this is it, an evermore struggling school district. We procrastinated and now a financially- strapped-district is in even deeper debt. Please, see the obvious answers and don't procrastinate. Be problem solvers not problem nurturers and procrastinators. Cutting hours of the taxpayers is ludicrous since that's how the state generates it's money, through the taxpayers!That's like cutting off your nose to spite your face. And I am sure other neighborhoods with several elementary schools can relate.
Posted on 10/27/2009
Elizabeth B. said...
Investigate cost savings a Health Savings Account (HSA) would provide to the district. This option would allow the district to reduce overall coverage costs, while giving employees the ability to save for future qualified medical and retiree health expenses on a tax-free basis. The U.S. Treasury website provides information http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/public-affairs/hsa/
Posted on 10/27/2009
Sally Smith said...
Increase co-pay for doctor visits from $5 to $20 for employees. Insurance costs for employees will bankrupt this district. No other employer pays costs for families. SDUSD cannot afford this. All employees' pay should be on direct-deposit. Eliminate the Senior Exhibition graduation requirement - this is nonsense since seniors have already received college admittance info and it is extremely time-consuming and costly. One packet is 26 pages. Employees are assigned to handle just ONE assignment for months - ridiculous. Saturday School should be used for instructional time not for babysitting since teachers get paid $40 an hour. Students are just sitting around. Parents have made it clear that extracurricular activities are a priority and since District must pay for those activities then eliminate Old Town and Balboa Park. Dr Grier stated these are accessible with free Tuesdays, on bus routes and by class field trips. Just like families have tightened their belts the Trustees have to do the same. Eliminate the police department and contract with SDPD for school police just as many cities do with the Sheriff's Department. Too many executive directors - don't need a Drop Out Office - merge with another. Community Relations can merge with another office. The County of San Diego has 1 employee but SDUSD has 3 in this office. Streamline curriculum. Too many specialized classes benefiting few students. ICC is not doing its job. Courses were approved in September '09 which is against Board Policy.Courses were approved for which there is no funding so students have to buy guitars to enroll or buy karate outfits to enroll. No funding then eliminate course. These are frill courses that the District cannot afford. Mandarin Chinese program is unfair - busing for students and expense per student in not equitable. Nice but the District can't afford it.
Posted on 10/27/2009
Stephen said...
Some More Things I would do to save money: * Consider four day school weeks and add an extra hour to the school day. This would save transportation costs, custodial costs, lunch costs, and lighting costs. Fridays could be used for extracurricular activities. * Consider charging a small fee for certain electives. School districts in Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Indiana, and other places do this. Reduce or waive the fee for students who qualify for free or reduced lunch. * Consider eliminating Saturday school detention, and replace it with weekday school detention. This would save Saturday staffing costs. * Consider reducing the summer school to a few campuses. This would save air conditioning, energy, and staffing costs. * Put computer switches and other equipment on timers and turn off the networking equipment after hours. Even if it was off 10PM - 6AM at each campus, this might add up to significant savings. * Get the students to do cleaning of the school. This will save janitorial costs. Schools in Japan do this. * At high schools with industrial arts classes, have one period in which the students get credit for performing maintenance tasks to the schools. This would reduce maintenance costs. * Consider furlough days for office staff, IMC, and other non-academic positions * Consider making spring break and part of winter break furlough days for teachers * Consider adjusting school start times so that transportation and buses do not occur during "rush hours". I bet high school students would not mind a 11-6PM school day! This would reduce fuel consumption. * Consider asking the charter schools if they would like to rejoin the district as a district operated school. I hear that it is less expensive to run a district run school. * Consider making inclusion the default placement for grades 9-12. The more students with special needs in high school classes would reduce segregated programs for these grades and improve their performance. * Consider decreasing the internet bandwidth between sites from 6MB to 4.5MB/sec. This would reduce the cost of one T-1 circuit per site. * Consider cutting the "double period" remedial english and math classes from high schools. * Consider increasing the class sizes slightly. * Consider making vice principals part time instead of full time. * Consider a trimester calendar (5 periods) and have some electives some of the trimester periods and others on other periods. This will allow more classes while not having to hire the same teachers all year long! For example, industrial arts could be offered in trimesters 1 and 2, home economics 2 and 3, and theatre 1 and 3. Del Norte HS in Poway is doing this. * Consider reducing the number of staff used for statistics and research about the kids progress for data reporting. * Consider reducing the hours of IMC, Wiggin Center, and certain offices at ed center. * Consider daytime games for football and other sports instead of night time when possible. * Consider waterless toilets in the mens restrooms. This would save water. * Reduce the amount of liability insurance * Curtail new textbooks and software upgrades * Reduce catering at conferences, staff trainings, and other staff events * Make only one menu for the school lunch (staff and students get the same meal) * Consider raising the price for school lunches * Offer older tenure track faculty early retirement * Consider hiring part time staff for electives. This means you will not have to pay benefits * Consider encouraging children to go to their neighborhood school over being bused somewhere.
Posted on 10/27/2009
Christine R. said...
I'm 31 and a 8th generation San Diegan. Most of what I know about Balboa Park is because of the Balboa Park Program. I also had a great teacher which I'm sure would fight to keep this program active. I remember all of my teachers from Mrs. Hood in Kindergarten to Mrs Durrand in 5th grade(who we through a surprise Baby shower for) all at Valencia Park Elementary. Mrs Lona Davies was amazing. I can still remember the lyrics to Dr. Lundgrens songs and I remember art projects by Mrs. Cohan... My point is to invest in your staff. Your teachers make the difference in the students. Good teachers who feel valued motivate children to enjoy learning. After all, that's what school is all about right? Extracurricular programs such as band, athletics and clubs will need to pay their own way. They can no longer be subsidized when class programs are being cut. Investigate the four-day week. Add the educational minutes by eliminating some of the minimum days and by lengthening the day. Close the district office one day a week, too, and reduce salaries by an equivalent amount. Cut district office staff to the bone. Yes, people will lose their jobs, but those people are not in the classroom. If that means the superintendent needs to open her own mail, too bad. He gets paid $250,000 for a reason. Also, if they hire a new super, enforce a clause in his/her contract dishonoring any 'buyout' should their term not be fulfilled. Keep P.E. at the elementary schools — because kids are getting fat — but drop it in high school. If you can't drop it, then give P.E. credit to kids who play a sport, and then you can eliminate a teacher or two. Sorry, but high school P.E. is a waste. Cut transportation. No one told you to move to the country, so there is no reason to get a free ride to school.
Posted on 10/27/2009
J Hendershot said...
12 month classified staff already have a modified work schedule with six unpaid furlow days. And now you want to add four more? Pretty soon we will be 11 month employees, not 12.
Posted on 10/28/2009
Philip Teates said...
As we are faced with deficits each year we see cuts from central office to the schools and support sites. It gets to the point of multiple cuts over several years continues to make us less efficient in our mission. I would suggest the following ideas to save the district a lot of money for next year and keep our staffing at the current level. 1. Our district should implement a four day, ten hour a day work week. This would save millions of dollars in not using electricity, low pressure gas, large quantities of water, gasoline, diesel, supplies, etc. I know this would be difficult for many to adjust to this change but it has been proven to save very large amounts of money and especially peoples jobs. This would also be good for the environment since we would not be driving on Friday to and from work in our private vehicles and school buses would also not be used that day. Recently 80% of the employees of the state of Utah have gone to this schedule and the savings is very impressive and it was far more than what was projected at the beginning of the transition. 2. Turn off every other light in all support rooms and support areas where the instructional process is not being taught. Inside hallways, staff lounges, supply rooms, counseling centers, etc. This would also save a lot of money over a year. Not only in electricity but the replacement of fluorescent tubes, ballasts and labor. 3. No overtime unless pre-approved and only for approved contracts or absolute emergencies.
Posted on 10/28/2009
URP said...
Before cutting away at any busing program, make a thorough and conscious evaluation of the real benefits versus detriments. I am a proud product of the busing program, and IT DOES WORK-- despite the criticism of most people who claim otherwise. Not only was I in the GATE program all the way through high school, I took pretty much all the Advanced/AP/Honors classes I was possibly allowed to, AND... graduated with a 4.0 + GPA, was accepted into some of the best universities, graduated from one, and am currently finishing a graduate degree (with no plans to stop there). (By the way, my three siblings all had the same results-- so, no, I am not the exception to the rule). In any event, for all those who are so opposed to children from disadvantaged communities being transported to "nice" schools, may I offer a suggestion? How about making the schools in disenfranchised communities UP TO PAR with schools in well-off communities. Yes, that would mean making an actual investment of time and resources on serious program improvement, more staff development and trainings, BETTER and MORE MOTIVATED teachers AND ADMINISTRATORS, more PARENT PARTICIPATION and INPUT, more testing preparation, the establishment of more GATE/Seminar programs, etc. This will not only cost LESS than the busing program in the long-run, but it will also eliminate a need for it altogether because children will be able to stay and prosper in their neighborhood schools, it will substantially produce better schools-- AND better results via student achievement and high graduation/college acceptance rates. Note that a child's success in school is dependent upon a multitude of factors, just as multiple social, political, economic, and personal/family issues are what stand between them and their achievements, so a MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH is what is needed; this does not happen in a vacuum. (Despite having graduated from high school more than ten years ago, I am thoroughly familiar with current, government-mandated documentation that schools have to produce in terms of accountability. Undoubtedly, these documents provide a real and sad reflection of the situation). Now, I can tell you right off the bat, an area where the district can certainly make serious changes is in their AGONIZINGLY long, bureaucratic hiring process. Streamline applications, consolidate tests for open vacancies. Digitize all correspondence in order to eliminate an additional waste of resources and man-hours. Or even better, incorporate the updates on applications/test results onto the candidates' on-line account, since any potential employee has to check frequently for new openings anyway. Make employees earn their keep, instead of just having them work semi-efficiently until their probationary period is over (and then inefficiently thereafter); receiving attitude from long-time staff that think they can treat people a certain way because they know their job is safe is not only a reflection upon the district, but a wrong approach in your hiring practices. There is too much complacency and mediocrity, especially among office staff. Don't eliminate summer school. Instead of making it a potential punishment for underachievers, keep it as continuous learning opportunity for all. I cannot believe schools still take the first couple of months of their fall semesters to review everything that was forgotten over summer. THAT is a total waste of time and resources. Kids do not need that additional idle time in the summer anyway, most do nothing educational that keeps their minds engaged. Make the school year go year-round, and you will see there will be no chance for their interest in school to wane in the first place.You may even see the graduation rate increase. Don't cut art/music programs, they are just as much of a necessity as the basics-- and, even now, children are leaving school with sub par skills in English and math-- this should tell you that what the district has been doing thus far is NOT WORKING. Make learning truly interesting, make it multidisciplinary, offer real-world applications for what they do-- especially with higher-level math and science, that tend to be a turn-off, even to good students. Cut salaries/establish a salary cap for top-tier administrative and executive-level staff, beginning with the superintendent, members of the school board, principals, vice principals, and program directors. Eliminate the petty politics that poison the efficiency of schools at a local level. Many principals are on a power-trip, and do not have a genuine interest in their schools. I know this from first-hand accounts of their reluctance to have their schools participate in FREE programs that benefit their students and the local community. That, simply put, is a shame, an embarrassment, and a waste of money. Again, MAKE THEM WORK FOR THEIR MONEY; demand concrete results, innovative approaches, actual research for the implementation of successful programs. There is no reason anyone, even a superintendent, can justify an exorbitant salary, if there are no results to back up their actual efforts. Make any raises CONTINGENT on real results. Audit constantly to keep your expenses in check-- it also aids in the timely discovery of potential problems and offers the district a fair chance to curtail already-present problems. (Plus, it keeps you from being embarrassed once again by the local media because of your accounting department's pre-historic record-keeping practices). Overall, the San Diego Unified School District has a long way to go in order to successfully function as an entity that produces constant and equal results. Hopefully, this is just the beginning of a truly productive and engaging dialogue between the district and the community.
Posted on 10/28/2009
Maureen said...
Why is aftercare free? I don't think the city of San Diego or the State of California should be paying for daycare. If 5000 students are in aftercare every day their parents should be paying something for it. Even $1/hour would be $5,000 per hour. 3 hours per day x 5 days per week = $75,000 week or $300,000.00 per month. Or, $3 million dollars per year. I just don't understand why it is acceptable that free childcare is being provided.
Posted on 10/28/2009
L. Gould said...
I would really like to know the impact on the budget for busing. When you think about the cost of gas, insurance, employees, maintenance, number of students on the buses, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see this cost more than any other in the SDUSD budget.
Posted on 10/29/2009
Sally Smith said...
All schools should have a work experience teacher so students can earn graduation credit through job experience. Seniors with more than enough grad credits should be on shortened days and go to community college or go to jobs. Don't pay teachers for courses these students do not need.Main factor in dropouts is the students needed to work (61% of SDUSD students are at poverty-level) and could not do both. Save money and help students.
Posted on 10/30/2009
