OK, here is my final posting describing the impact of the override on the schools. Again, I'm using the most recent data presented (February 9th SC meeting), and the only update since then is that our estimate of 5% local aid cut was too high -- legislature is now saying we will have a 4% cut at worst (so we have another $80,000ish to play with regardless of whether the override passes).
Here is what the HS will look like next year IF an override passes and IF it doesn't pass:
Administration - next year, the high school is projected to have 1 principal, 1 assistant principal, a school year only assistant principal, a school year only athletic director, 1 librarian, 2 library paraprofessionals, 2 nurses, 8.7 clerical, and 7.8 custodian. The only impact of the override is that the librarian will go to 80% time if the override doesn't pass.
Department Heads - next year, the projections is to have 3.6 department head equivalent positions. If the override fails, this will be cut to 2.3 department head positions, meaning less of a teaching relief for department heads, and some consolidation of DH positions (e.g., English and ELL under one DH, combining some electives under one DH).
Guidance - next year, the high school is estimated to have 3.9 caseload counselors, 1 Academic Achievement Counselor, a .8 Student Achievement Counselor, a .9 outreach worker, 1.8 deans, 2.0 campus monitors, and 1 college counselor. The only impact of an override is that one of the deans will go to 80% time.
Regular Education Teachers - next year, the HS is projected to have 65.3 teachers. If the override fails, 9.7 teaching positions would be cut (this includes 4.3 in regular academic departments, .2 by combining advanced Chinese sections, .5 by referring students who struggle in English to the Academic Achievement Center, .8 in PE, 1 in performing arts, 1.3 in tech/business/computers, and 2.8 in family/consumer science -- meaning the family/consumer science program would end). The specific classes this would impact have yet to be determined (this would be decided by Mark Jackson), but estimates are that 4.3 cuts to academic departments would increase class sizes as follows: 24 in English from 22 now, 22 in science from 21 now, 24 in math from 21 now, 25 in social studies from 22 now; no change in world language. NOTE: in 2003-2004, class sizes were 21.8 in English, 23.7 in social studies, 24.3 in science, and 23.2 in math - so even without an override, class sizes will be smaller next year in science than they were in 2003, and less than 1 student more per class in math compared to 2003.
Intervention Teachers - next year, the HS is projected to have 1.6 English language education teachers, .1 Project Challenge teacher, .2 Prep Academy teacher, 1 Math Academic Achievement Center Paraprofessional, and 1.4 ELL paraprofessionals. If the override fails, the .2 Prep Academy teacher would be cut and support would be provided instead in the Academic Achievement Center.
Special Education teachers/paraprofessionals - next year, the high school is projected to have 3 academic skills positions, 5.6 specialized programs positions, 1.6 psychologists, 1.2 education team leaders, 1.1 therapists (occupational, speech), and 33.6 paraprofessionals. If the override doesn't pass, 2.4 of these 48.5 positions would be cut (which ones would depend on student needs).
Non-Special Education Paraprofessionals - next year, the high school is projected to have 2.6 paraprofessionals (1 for copy service, 1 for computer lab, .6 for science lab). If the override fails, the copy service paraprofessional position would be cut.
Preschool - the high school preschool is projected to have 2 positions for next year (1 teacher, 1 paraprofessional). This staffing is not impacted by the override.
Note: Students will still take 13 classes a year and have two study halls in a trimester system (typically 10 academic classes a year and three electives of some type) regardless of whether an override passes.
My Goal in Blogging
I started this blog in May of 2008, shortly after my election to the School Committee, because I believed it was very important to both provide the community with an opportunity to share their thoughts with me about our schools and to provide me with an opportunity for me to ask questions and share my thoughts and reasoning. I have found the conversation generated on my blog to be extremely helpful to me in learning community views on many issues. I appreciate the many people who have taken the time to share their views. I believe it is critical to the quality of our public schools to have a public discussion of our community priorities, concerns and aspirations.