Amherst schools budget calls for 'staggering' cuts
Teacher union won't give up wage hikes
By NICK GRABBE - Hampshire Gazette
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
AMHERST - The Regional School Committee voted 6-1 Tuesday to approve a budget with massive cuts, in response to drastic reductions in state aid.
Member Andrew Churchill said he wanted to "send a clear signal" to the Amherst-Pelham Education Association, in hopes the union will reconsider its decision not to agree to reopen its contract's wage provisions.
The contract provides teachers with a 3.5 percent cost-of-living increase for the next fiscal year, with about half the teachers also getting 4 percent "step" increases. Interim Superintendent Maria Geryk announced the union's decision at Tuesday's School Committee meeting.
The $27.7 million regional school budget, as voted, is 1.2 percent lower than the current year's. The budget would require cuts of the equivalent of 17.66 positions at the high school, 8.2 of them teachers. The middle school cuts would be 9.4 positions, 8.4 of them teachers.
The regional cuts also include elimination of three full-time equivalents in the central office, cuts of three teams and an athletics fee hike at the high school, and giving up $115,250 for professional development. There are also cuts in supplies, books, equipment, and teacher substitutes.
The elementary schools face the loss of the equivalent of 16.55 full-time positions in school-based staff and 6.5 positions in the central office.
No one on the School Committee was happy with the cuts, which total 50 full-time equivalents at both the regional and elementary levels.
Irv Rhodes called them "devastating" and "unconscionable." Farshid Hajir called them "staggering" and said, "This is a sad day." Marianne Jorgensen, the only member to vote against the budget, called the budget "shocking" and "a severe altering of the programs of our schools."
Churchill said another reason to vote the budget Tuesday was to remove ambiguity. High School Principal Mark Jackson, who will speak to teachers after school today, said half of them are "hanging by their fingertips, wondering about their future." Many have rewritten their resumes and some have gotten other job offers, he said.
Administrators and the union have one more shot to come up with an alternative plan, Churchill said. The union should consider that "maybe we could make some concessions and have smaller class sizes and not get so many of our colleagues cut," he said.
Amherst Town Meeting will reconvene to vote on a budget June 15, and Pelham Town Meeting will reconvene June 13. Shutesbury and Leverett have already voted regional school budgets with a much less severe level of cuts.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
66 comments:
Why are 8 teachers being cut from the high school and eight from the middle school? With half the amount of students, isn't the middle school being hit twice as hard? Also, what will the number of students be in high school classes next year? As high as the middle school?
I understand that it is up to the teacher's union whether to re-enter negotiations. I also think that an AVERAGE salary of ~62K in the AP- regional and ~59K for elementary is a lot of money for a ten month salary with 3 weeks vacation (plus benefits). I don't see that anyone could make an argument that our teachers are poorly paid. Remember these are averages!! It now is up to the teachers to decide what they value more? Those teachers who will be laid off, or a very BIG raise (i.e. some will receive a 7.5% raise, if I understand it correctly). Perhaps they could consider a medium raise given the assurance that the money goes specifically to those in their union that would have lost their jobs. I know of one outstanding second grade teacher whose job is on the line and I am saddened by the idea of losing her.
I value teachers immensely and think they should get a living wage. I think the AVERAGE salary our teachers get seems like a pretty good one...
AVERAGE salary of ~62K in the AP- regional and ~59K for elementary
Can you identify where you got this information so that others can independently verify this?
I got it from http://www.amherstbythenumbers.blogspot.com/
My previous post opinions are based on considering these figures are accurate...
Abbie, the high raise number is for teachers who still qualify for "step" raises. Add in the cost of living increase and you get the higher figure.
Remember that the most senior teachers do NOT recieve step raises, and are therefore dependent on the cost of living increases to keep up with the cost of living (increased assessments on home values, cuts to health insurance benefits, child care cost increases, heating fuel, etc, etc, etc.)
Bear in mind, too, to balance salary with working conditions. Teachers in this district are under heavy fire right now from the school committee, with heavier workloads looming, and low morale.
Also, I would suggest that you ask your favorite second grade teacher how she spends, or used to spend, her "vacations". Vacations for the kids are not necessarily vacations for the teachers.
Yesterday I did a post on the average teacher salaries in local districts, which is what Abbie is referencing. You can link to it here. If you want to look at the complete information on teacher salaries in all districts in Massachusetts for the past five years, you can download the spreadsheet from the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education here.
With half the amount of students, isn't the middle school being hit twice as hard?
So much for wanting "excellence" for our middleschoolers...
Thank you for the link Allison.
Looks like average salaries for 2008 in "comparable", "peer" disctrics are much higher, for example:
Brookline: $78,308
Newton: $70,961
Dover: $77,088
And that is without any anticipated raises.
Dover?
Dover is a very wealthy town in the Boston suburbs.
Vacations for teachers might not be the same as vacation for the kids, but not having to show up for work every day all day for 8-10 weeks during the summer means no cost for child care/camps for their kids. Summer can be expensive for working parents who cannot afford to take the entire summer off with their kids. So there is some cost savings for them right there if they have kids.
To anon@10:03
I agree with almost everything you say. I am simply saying this is the time when teachers can voice whether they think keeping some of their colleagues is worth taking a smaller raise. They might not think it is (or rather a minority might think it is).
I work at UMass and frequently oppose what our union espouses. For example, I would pay more in health insurance if it meant fewer UMass employees would be laid off. Unfortunately, I seem to be in the minority...And I recognize that some teachers might want to forgo some of their raise but not the majority...
My opinion is that teachers should be scrutinized. This is part of their jobs. My family has experienced some super teachers and some less great teachers. There should be some evaluation, especially given the salaries we provide. I think there should be a link between performance and pay (I don't know how that would/should be implemented and I recognize the difficulty in that...).
I also think that the "working conditions" in Amherst do not compare with those at a lot (most?) of schools in our country and are infinitely better. This comment I don't agree with at all!
Yes, the salaries in Brookline, Dover, and Newton are higher. But so is the cost of living in those towns. Don't take my word for it...check out these maps which let you see all sorts of information about Massachusetts cities and towns in a visual way. Look at the data under housing maps and economic maps to try to get at the relative cost of living in Amherst and those communities.
Yeah, I tossed Doved into the mix just for fun, but included Brookline and Newton specifically because they are often cited by CS as peer institutions with Amherst. They, too, are very wealthy Boston area towns.
To anon@1024
do you know that average house price in these districts and how much they bring in wrt to property taxes? This is a question of what we can afford given what we bring in (i.e. property taxes). That's the bottom line! It is still a mystery to me how the teachers contract was accepted by the town side. Given our constraints of prop 2.5, how could we give raises that go beyond 2.5% (MAXIMUM).
Perhaps a remedial math course is appropriate... I'm still not sure folks understand what Prop 2.5 means.
I also think that the "working conditions" in Amherst do not compare with those at a lot (most?) of schools in our country and are infinitely better. This comment I don't agree with at all!
I suppose it depends on how one defines working conditions.
We could compare it to office work this way for example:
Is your boss riding your a**? In Amherst, this would be the SC. Check!
Are you and your co-workers overworked? Are you spendng your "vacations" doing other work just to stay in the game? If we consider the upcoming student to teacher ratio with the demand that teachers deliver the same or better service- check!
Are you paying more for health insurance? So much that some of your co-workers can't afford it? check!
Are your child care costs going up? (As they are if your kid is in the HS day care program?) check!
Aaannndd so forth...
Anon 10:50,
My coworkers and I (who do not work for the government either in Amherst or elsewhere) can list all of those checks that you list for teachers PLUS the additional check of NO RAISE for us! I don't think the working conditions of our teachers are any more stressful this year than working conditions for the majority of other workers in the country. Everyone is more stressed financially. Everyone's health insurance costs are going up. Everyone's retirement value is going down. Everyone has to assume more work as coworkers get laid off. And most of us are not getting a raise, let alone a 3.5% raise.
Which 3 sports teams?
My vote:
intramural utlimate
indoor track
ice hockey
Gazette article about Northampton and teacher raises...
http://www.gazettenet.com/2009/06/04/pay-issue-divides-teachers-union-brass
For the number of "smart" people living in this area, it is mildly surprising that so many accept whatever ideas come across the news as truth.
Here's a few nuggets to chew on:
1. The school committee members have forgotten that they negotiated this salary for the teachers union. Now they pointing fingers and essentially laying the weight of the financial crisis at the teachers' feet. When is one of them going to stand up and say that?
2. I have been a teacher for more than 20 years and I have never once not worked during the summer. My teaching salary is not substantial enough to pay my bills. My kids' college costs alone put me in debt for the rest of my life.
3. Is teaching known to be one of America's better paid jobs? If that were the case, why have I heard my entire life that it's too bad we can't afford to pay teachers more.
4. No one is bitching about the local college professors who are on paid leave, i.e. sabbatical. Why not? Oh, I get it. It's ok to have months paid away from your job as long as it's not on the public nickel. That clears it up.
And how much time do college professors get off during their jobs? Count the days and weeks and you'll see it is far more than public school teachers.
5. If you think morale is low now, just keep pounding away at hte idea that the teachers can solve all of our financial problems. That will really help boost morale.
6. When is the town of Amherst going to wake up and establish a solid business tax base so that we can afford the schools we think we want?
7. When are we going to ask the school committee why they paid more than top dollar for a superintendent? What has the super done for the past six years except wring his/her hands over the budget. We already are paying an accountant to tell us the budget numbers. We don't need an educational visionary if we can't afford more than bare bones education.
Yes, the salaries in Brookline, Dover, and Newton are higher. But so is the cost of living in those towns.
The only problem is that it cannot be assumed that teachers actually own houses in those towns. Maybe they are commuting from mid-state somewhere? Maybe they are forced to rent? These comparisons can be difficult and can get pretty squishy pretty easily.
Just to throw another idea out there to save money. I have a friend who is a history teacher in another district. He takes classes towards his masters and gets reimbursed from the school assuming his grades are good. Can we ask Umass, Amherst, or Hampshire to reduce or eliminate the cost of these course for our teachers and ultimately our town, assuming we incur them.
Mike, this is a great idea as far as teacher training costs in general go, but Amherst does not reimburse its teachers for their graduate work. Lots of Boston area schools do do this though, so you are right about that.
I worry about the art and music teachers being asked to work part-time. How will they survive on an 8/10ths salary next year?
To anon@1139:
clearly you feel very strongly that teachers should stick to the contract and that's ok. I simply suggested that teachers ought to consider it in the light of THEIR colleagues losing there jobs and hence some of your (ie teachers) load will increase concomitantly.
But I do want to reply to your points.
1. The school committee members have forgotten that they negotiated this salary for the teachers union. Now they pointing fingers and essentially laying the weight of the financial crisis at the teachers' feet. When is one of them going to stand up and say that?
REPLY: I haven't heard ANY SC member pointing the finger and asking teachers to take a cut. Other folks are raising the issue and asking whether teachers would examine the idea. Which they could reject...
2. I have been a teacher for more than 20 years and I have never once not worked during the summer. My teaching salary is not substantial enough to pay my bills. My kids' college costs alone put me in debt for the rest of my life.
REPY: some would say you, at least, have the option of getting extra income. Those with a 12 month salary don't have much option (unless they take on a "second" job).
3. Is teaching known to be one of America's better paid jobs? If that were the case, why have I heard my entire life that it's too bad we can't afford to pay teachers more.
REPLY: A lot of teachers in our country make WAY less than our Amherst teachers and have to work with much fewer resources and much more challenging students...I would hazard that a lot of folks when learning the average salary of OUR teachers might think its not too bad...
4. No one is bitching about the local college professors who are on paid leave, i.e. sabbatical. Why not? Oh, I get it. It's ok to have months paid away from your job as long as it's not on the public nickel. That clears it up.
REPLY: Sabbatical isn't a paid vacation. Faculty do research or do other scholarly work.
And how much time do college professors get off during their jobs? Count the days and weeks and you'll see it is far more than public school teachers.
REPLY: I can't speak for others but at UMass we get NO official vacation (other than recognized holidays). I personally take about 2 weeks/year. I work most weekends. Regardless of whether I get summer salary off grants, I work summers just like during the school year.
PLUS I spent about 10 more years (with low, if any salary) preparing for this position compared to a elementary/middle/high school teacher.
5. If you think morale is low now, just keep pounding away at hte idea that the teachers can solve all of our financial problems. That will really help boost morale.
REPLY: I am not pounding away. I can't see, though, that experiencing your colleagues being laid off is a very uplifting experience. Personally, I am willing to take the educational hits for my kid wrt to layoffs, I just hate to see valued teachers losing their jobs. I would vote for an override in a heartbeat to stop it...
6. When is the town of Amherst going to wake up and establish a solid business tax base so that we can afford the schools we think we want?
REPY: I am with you here 100%!!!
7. When are we going to ask the school committee why they paid more than top dollar for a superintendent? What has the super done for the past six years except wring his/her hands over the budget. We already are paying an accountant to tell us the budget numbers. We don't need an educational visionary if we can't afford more than bare bones education.
REPLY: I tend to agree but don't know the details of the negotiations. But we may also disagree because I think the super didn't do his job wrt to the teachers contract with offered raises above what we can afford as limited by Prop 2.5.
Dear Abbie, dear Abbie, (with apologies to John Prine)
Let's find a different group on whose back we'll try to balance the budget. The Amherst teachers worked with a 1% raise in our last contract. Is anyone reporting that?
The school committee was quick to agree to our current contractual salary numbers because it knew we had taken a serious hit in the previous contract.
You need to look closer at what certain school committee members are saying. Ms. Anderson and Mr. Churchill have both openly stated teachers shoud give back their raise.
Here's what the Gazette printed the other day: "Member Andrew Churchill said he wanted to 'send a clear signal' to the Amherst-Pelham Education Association, in hopes the union will reconsider its decision not to agree to reopen its contract's wage provisions."
"A lot of teachers in our country make WAY less than our Amherst teachers and have to work with much fewer resources and much more challenging students..."
Any data to support this statement? What is "a lot"? What is "WAY less"? How do you know how challenging Amherst or any other students are?
I imagine that every public school teacher I have ever known would jump at the opportunity to get paid to do research. See, we have do to that on our own time and we don't get paid for it. The state mandates teachers earn a master's degree within 5 years of getting the initial teaching license. Payment for that degree comes out of our pockets, and the work is done as a second job.
If teaching is such a cake job, then why aren't young people who are looking to make big money fast lining up to become teachers?
This problem will not be solved until the town wakes up. You can't have a quaint, little New England town with no substantial tax base and expect great schools. There is no magic dust. The state has substantially changed its funding model over the past 6 years.
Things will change in the Amherst schools. There will be far fewer teachers and far fewer opportunities for students.
Some want the teachers to save the day this year. Who is going to save the day next year? And the year after that? This economic problem is not news for Amherst. We have been ignoring this problem for a long time.
If the school committee thinks the schools’ situation is that desperate, then why were they actively seeking to hire yet another administrator at the central office level, a highly paid administrator at that? Like all politicians, they speak out of both sides of their mouths.
Teachers are the one group that has 100% contact with students every day of the school year. How much direct student contact time do central office administrators have?
Dear anon@2:01 (the same as 11:39?)
What can I say- if you had wanted to get paid to do research then maybe that's what you should have trained to do. Does that help the discussion?
You cannot convince me that teaching in Amherst is anything like teaching in an inner city school in Baltimore or Detroit or a number of other equally dismal places, where kids have to go through metal detectors, etc. Lets not enter this discussion because its beside the point!
I know for a fact "Teach for America" has attracted a lot of takers this year. They are getting $50k to start. But this is combat pay- they are working in the worst of the worst schools.
You are so very defensive about Amherst salaries. What does a starting teacher make here? If the average is $59-62K it must be pretty high...I just goggled and got a starting salary of ~39K for a teacher with a Bachelors in Nebraska (http://www.teacher-world.com/teacher-salary/nebraska.html) and here is Boston MA (http://www.teacher-world.com/teacher-salary/massachusetts.html). So there are teachers in our country that make less than our teachers. Does this satisfy you?
I am not asking teachers to do anything except consider whether they want to take LESS of a raise and keep MORE of their colleagues employed. I actually don't see these cuts affecting my kid (so I am not suggesting this out of any selfish reason) but I do see them affecting a lot of families where someone will lose a job.
I agree there is no magic dust and if, or until, Amherst has another source of money we CANNOT be offering our employees raises that go ABOVE 2.5% (MAXIMUM).
If Shutesbury, Leverett and Pelham all vote a higher budget for the regional schools, will Amherst then be obliged to support that higher level as well? Is the Finance Committee prepared to use more reserve funds to make up that difference? If not, will additional cuts then have to come from other areas of the town budget?
My thoughts about teachers and their raises:
I'm at UMass, a paid MSP member (i.e., part of the MTA), and I think the teachers in town have to do what's best for them. I'm going without a raise this year, but I think it's great that some teachers are able to at least keep up with inflation.
I, for one, would be willing to give up a raise under certain, very specific conditions and maybe our teachers would consider doing so as well. If, for example, they believe they can save a few teaching positions by putting off their raises, then that might be a reason to do so.
BUT, they would need ironclad guarantees that they'll get the promised raises and more as back pay for doing this when budgets improve. AND, they would need ironclad promises that the money would go directly to keeping teaching jobs and not pay for administration or other expenses.
Some of this is close to what the MSP did in its negotiations with UMass.
That's just my opinion. I think they have to do what they think is right.
Having said that, I also think the teachers should try to play a more active role in addressing the really poor job of budgeting that has been done in the past. It's not at all their fault, but they're on the front lines and have the best understanding of what's really wasteful.
I would love to hear from teachers about things like the MM trailers, the Mullins Center graduation, and other bells and whistles that administrators and previous School Committees paid for that we really can't afford right now.
The blog is loaded with anonymous posters. It might be appropriate for teachers discussing some of that wasteful spending to do so anonymously. I would really love to hear what they have to say.
Catherine,
Alison pointed out the there is a job ad for a Chinese teacher at WW. I understood Chinese was to get cut. I can't see the logic in keeping a Chinese teacher while other (presumably) more critical teaching positions are being cut. Is the full salary (and associated costs) covered by a Fed grant?
I have a very pro-union background. Without union benefits my parents got, I would never have been able to go to college. But I can't accept the union's argument without question, either. The majority of costs in the schools budget comes from salaries and benefits. So by not reducing these substantial raises, they're choosing to dramatically increase class size, and the average teacher workload, and to get colleagues fired. This isn't blaming anyone, it's just an arithmetic fact. I think it's the wrong choice, too. I haven't had a raise in years, I can barely pay my property taxes. Sure, it's nice to get a fat raise, but you guys are going to more than earn the increase with increased stress, more work to correct, and more unruly classes.
This contract was irresponsible from the moment it came out. Couldn't agree more that raises should be capped at 2.5% maximum, given the realities of the town's budget. As a practical matter, with healthcare costs going up even faster than that, raises have to be under the maxiumum percentage increase for the district towns' budgets-- under 2.5%. Without otherr cuts, this is again, just arithmetic.
I've suggested this before, and I'll say it again here. By doing one thing, Mr. Rodriguez could earn enormous good will, cut the floor out from under his biggest critics, and gain a big bargaining advantage with the union. How? By giving up the large raise he negotiated to get the superintendent's job and then ask the same of the union. It's called leading by example. Saving the schools from disaster as his first public act. Up for it, Mr Rodriguez?
Abbie...You say you haven't heard any school committee members ask teachers to give back their negotiated raises. Perhaps you haven't attended meetings but I have. I have heard Kathleen Anderson repeatedly blame teachers for the budget problem. Her words went something like this "If the teachers would just give back their raises we wouldn't have this problem." If you want the exact wording, go back a couple of meetings and watch it on TV. She has said this numerous times and it has also appeared in the paper.
It's this kind of blame that only makes things worse. I'm wondering if she was on the school board a couple of years ago when teachers agreed to a 1% raise with the promise that it would be made up later. Now the "made up later" time is here and the pressure's on to give back again. There's quite a bit of misinformation out there and again, it only makes things worse when a committee member like Ms. Anderson sets teachers up as having caused this budget problem.
To anon@424:
let me be clear. Prop 2.5 limits our ability to raise revenue through property taxes to increases of 2.5%/year (not including new growth, etc). That's it, excluding local aid, our revenue can increase maximally by about 2.5% (a little more with the new growth revenue- not much in this town). What I am saying is that WHOEVER is doing the negotiating with the unions and offers raises (and fringe like retirement and health) that go beyond our means (limited by Prop 2.5) is IRRESPONSIBLE. That is who I blame for part of this problem. This year, however, the problem has been exacerbated dramatically by the cut in local aid.
However, I imagine that you might find these restrictions on salaries to be harsh. I hope that teachers recognize these limits and if they can't then I guess they will have to find jobs in a state that doesn't have such a limit or a MA town that frequently votes for overrides.
I am NOT blaming teachers for this problem. We are in the worst recession since the great depression. There is lots of blame to go around (banks being greedy and stupid and individuals buying lots more than they can afford). I am just hoping a way can be found that fewer folks lose their jobs. In this case, it does seem that teachers (through their union) have the ability to prevent some loses. Its a choice. Some may want to take less of an increase, but its up to the teachers whether they want to consider it or not.
ps to anon@424:
yes, I do recall Kathleen pointing out a way to close the gap would be for teachers to forgo their raises. I DID NOT hear her say that teachers were to blame for the financial crisis. Can you confirm she said that teachers were to blame. She is logically correct in her statement, it WOULD help close the gap. The question is whether it is an appropriate or ethical choice. Her statements, I believe, were in the context of closing MM, where many parents were demanding all cost saving measures be examined. I don't see how you can argue that it wouldn't save $$ for teachers to forgo their raises. Perhaps we are discussing different SC mtgs?
I'm wondering if she was on the school board a couple of years ago when teachers agreed to a 1% raise with the promise that it would be made up later. Now the "made up later" time is here and the pressure's on to give back again.
amen
Joel: I worked for almost ten years in the Amherst schools and I would like to say a few things here. I cannot believe that teachers--the ones who are with kids sometimes more than their own parents and teach far beyond the book lessons are even being considered to forgo their raises. Why on earth would they be asked to lift the burden of this money mess?! There are many, many kids coming here from Holyoke, Springfield, and other cities who bring along with them the challenges of a lifestyle that are quite different than the average child might experience. My first year teaching I was stunned at the behaviors of some of the kids in the classroom. You don't have to go to Boston to see these behaviors in kids. Teachers deal with them every day and the work is extremely stressful and drains your energy in a way that cannot be compared to anything I've known yet!
It's work--it's work that is shaping the future, that takes a special kind of caring and investment that should be praised til no tomorrow and recognized instead of slammed and insulted by saying you're not valued--which is exactly the message given when rasies are being denied or held back. Next to a mother and father who are a child's first teacher the classroom teacher comes next. Mullins Center graduation--how silly--the high school has beautiful fields and lots of folding chairs....perfect setting for a momentous day.
I have hope that one day the right person will come along and see through all the hoopla in administrative positions and save our schools millions--yeah probably 2 or 3--by cutting out the made up administrative positions that are just not needed.
I am one of the teachers willing to consider renegotiating, although I may be in the minority. For me, it would definitely be tied to several conditions:
*saving positions, particularly those that affect teachers' working conditions;
*sharing the pain--if taxpayers approve an override that raises the average tax bill by $400 then the average teacher raise is cut by that same amount;
*the superintendent makes some kind of salary gesture.
I don't agree with the previous poster who thinks we can save two or three million dollars by cutting unnecessary administrators. If you cut ten administrators at $100K each, that would be only one million. I don't think there even are ten administrators making that much.
I also don't agree that we have too many administrators. Administrators are currently stretched very thin. I don't think the public understands all of the things that they have to do. We should do a better job of communicating that.
I teach in the high school and would like to point out that teachers will be working much harder next year. Our classes, some of which are already 30 (mine average 24, however), will increase in size. I assume non-teachers do not realize how each student translates into additional time. For every student added to the class, the classroom management increases, of course, but so do the hours spent grading (already English and Social Studies teachers grade up to 3 hours a night and more hours on weekends) and contacting parents and liaisons. In addition, next year support services are decreasing significantly, so teachers will be required to do even more on his or her own, with no support, for every child who struggles. These cuts are on top of the cuts we have taken for the past few (several?) years.
None of my commentary is meant as a complaint. I LOVE teaching, and I truly believe I have the best job in the world. You all should be jealous of me if you are not teachers! I wish that more of you would join the field. We can ALWAYS use more excellent teachers in this country. It is a tough, tough job, more rewarding than any I have ever had, and if you are up for it, join us.
I am merely pointing out that the town is getting more for their money next year: teachers will be working more hours than ever. To me, this reality feels very much like a concession we are laredy taking.
Question: what is the status of the Chinese program at WW? It was funded with Federal grant money, and the grant is expiring. Are the costs now part of the regular budget? How much does this program cost?
Thank you.
OK, finally here I am with my responses:
Anonymous 9:36 - there are frankly more things to cut in the HS other than teachers -- so, things like $100,000 from the athletic budget and $71,819 (child study program) don't exist at the MS to be cut. The average number of students in a HS class will be 25 to 29. So, about the same as the MS (27 in 7th, 25 in 8th). I think these class sizes all around are too high -- but I will also point out that my 10-year-old (5th grade) is in a class of 26 or 27 this year, and will be next year as well. So, it is NOT just the MS/HS teachers who are experiencing large classes.
Abbie - I am not going to comment on the wage issue ... and I do think that teachers must decide for themselves how to go here. Two issues I will comment on: first, I don't think these wage increases should have been agreed to -- I can't imagine the district EVER thought they could afford it. Second, even if teachers went to 2% raises (from 3.5%), it saves basically 2 or 3 elementary teachers and 2 or 3 regional teachers. So, this would be ONE teacher per school, basically. It is NOT the difference between not losing any teachers, or saving the great teacher your kid now has or whatever. The teachers therefore have to think about the totality of the impact -- how many jobs will be saved, and how many people will experience lower raises than anticipated. Again, I honestly don't have a thought as to what they should do -- I assume teachers are conveying their thoughts to the union.
Anonymous 10:03 - I agree with much of what you say ... including that more seniors teachers are (like most of us) facing major declines in the stock market and retirement savings, and that may make reducing next year's income even less palatable. I'm sorry that you chose to write "Teachers in this district are under heavy fire right now from the school committee" -- can you explain what this means? For the life of me, I'm trying to understand how asking for evidence-based decision-making or evaluation is "coming under fire."
Alison - thanks for the data!
Anonymous 10:13 - two points here. First, as I've noted above, the MS has fewer things to cut. Second, the superintendent and the principals decide on the budget -- the SC actually just votes a number. I would hope that everyone still wants excellence at all of the schools, yes?
Anonymous 10:24 - I'm not really sure of your point here ... our salaries are in line with (actually higher than) local districts, and I don't think comparing salaries to the eastern part of the state makes sense, given the higher cost of living there than here. My husband works in the Springfield office of the Mass. Attorney General, and gets lower pay than lawyers in the Boston office, for example.
Anonymous 10:30 - exactly!
"I also don't agree that we have too many administrators. Administrators are currently stretched very thin...."
As a former administrator, all I can say is PLEASE!
More responses:
Anonymous 10:30 - good point. Teachers can also make extra money in the summer by teaching summer school.
Abbie - excellent points -- all of them.
Allison - thanks for the link.
Anonymous 10:35 - I'm trying to understand your point here. We should pay teachers what they pay in Boston? So, we'd have even fewer teachers? Would we then get the curriculum in these schools? Again, just give me the point you are trying to make here!
Abbie - I agree that it is hard to imagine how these wages were agreed to ... given the 2.5% constraint.
Anonymous 10:50 - I agree with many of your points ... yet, again, I have no idea what the "Is your boss riding your a**? In Amherst, this would be the SC. Check!" means. First, the SC can only "ride one a**" -- that is the superintendent. Second, you are seriously complaining that the SC asks for data, or surveys? Just define what "riding your a**" means. And think about the message you are sending to parents who read this blog -- that the SC asking for data, evaluation, etc., is somehow unreasonable and unfair and a bad working condition. That seems pretty sad to me.
I understand that teaching conditions are hard ... and getting harder. That is true for me as well, for the record -- this fall, I will teach 200 students (and no teaching assistants at Amherst College). I know how it feels to have 200 exams, or 200 papers, or 200 students with emails and questions, etc. I also won't be getting any raise this year. And I spend my vacations preparing for the semester -- as I'm sure you do. Again, I don't think anyone is saying (and I'm certainly not saying) that being a teacher is easy ... or getting easier. And if those bad working conditions means the teachers want to stick with the promised raises, you have every right to do so.
Anonymous 11:02 - that is all certainly true for me!
Anonymous 11:26 - the teams to be eliminated was decided by the HS. One was some type of skiing (downhill?). Another was JV - B ultimate. I can't remember the third -- but it is probably on an earlier blog posting!
Still more from me:
Abbie - thanks for the link.
Anonymous 11:39 - you make a number of good points. Let me respond to a few. First, I agree that the SC negotiated these in good faith -- and thus we of course have to follow through (though that raises the question of whether they should have been agreed to). Second, I don't think anyone (at least not me) is saying teachers are overpaid. I think the issue people are concerned about (and I am NOT one of them) is that teachers are getting raises this summer at a time in which many people across the country aren't. That's pretty much it. Third, I'm on sabbatical now, which means a reduced salary for me (and yes, we've felt it). But a sabbatical means that I am supposed to be writing books and articles and analyzing data. It is not a vacation, nor is it "months away from my job." I'm working harder now on my research than I can do during the school year -- and I'm expected to do this research, which is why we have sabbaticals. I also work at Amherst College -- so it is NOT the "public nickel". Again, the time that college professors get off during their jobs is virtually none -- because professors are supposed to be doing research ALL THE TIME -- it is not just that we are on vacation when the students are away or when we aren't physically teaching class. The "job" of professor is partly to teach, but partly to do research (and that research piece is pretty much what we have to do to get tenure). Fourth, I have never said, and will never say, that teachers should give up their raises. I know I'm constantly accused of "teacher-bashing," but pay attention to who is and who is not asking for wage concessions on the SC. It isn't always the "known teacher-bashers." Fifth, I'm on town meeting, and I vote for increasing business whenever I can precisely for the reason you state. These votes, however, often lose. Sixth, you can go through my blog postings to see how I voted on the superintendent salary.
Anonymous 11:40 - indeed. Very squishy!
Mike - this is a good idea ... but it could only be U Mass, since the other colleges don't offer masters. And I'm all for asking U Mass to chip in to our district (especially once we give back MM).
Anonymous 12:00 - are you a teacher? Would you find a reimbursement for educational classes (like towards a masters) useful? Would other teachers?
Still more responses:
Anonymous 12:16 - first, the plan to have all specials teachers go to 80% has been revised -- there are now proportionate cuts, based on number of classes taught (so these cuts aren't happening at the larger schools in which teachers have responsibility for many classrooms). Second, some teachers at the other schools teach at more than one school (like the music teacher at MM also teaches at Pelham). So, it is NOT that all specials teachers are going to 80%.
(I'm going to stay out of the Abbie/Anonymous dialogue here!)
Worried - Leverett and Shutesbury already voted Level 1 budget. The Pelham FC recommended Level 3 (worse than ours), and will vote on June 13th. So, it seems unlikely that Pelham will vote a Level 1 budget. However, if that happened, I think it would be a big issue at TM (do we change the town assessments, or do we take money out of reserves, etc.).
Joel - I agree whole-heartedly that teachers would need to get some kind of guarantees that any concessions would save teaching jobs. I'm not sure how realistic it is to give concessions based on future raise promises ... right?!? I also would like to hear from teachers (anonymously or to my private email -- casanderson@amherst.edu) about other ways of cutting money/budgeting wisely with limited resources.
Abbie - Alison brought this to my attention, and I'm trying to get the answer. I don't know it yet.
AJ - I'm not going to make any recommendations to teachers ... but I agree that the SC shouldn't have agreed to it ... and that the new super could buy some really big good will be making such a gesture.
(Also staying out of the Abbie/Anonymous debates here)
Anonymous 7:48 - I agree with much, though not all, of what you said. I certainly think teachers are very, very important. The single best teacher I ever had (from elementary school to graduate school) was my 7th and 8th grade English teacher -- and he was the single person most responsible for shaping my writing for the rest of my life. However, I don't think that not giving a raise is a sign of disrespect -- I'm getting NO RAISE this year, and I don't feel disrespected by my college. I feel that times are really tight, and it is OK for faculty to take a hit right now to preserve other things (e.g., financial aid for students). I agree that we need to consider whether the Mullins Center is the right way to spend money right now. I don't know of the many unnecessary administrative positions that you are describing -- could you name such positions?
Nina - thanks for your post. I do think negotiations (if the union wanted to negotiate) could involve mandating saving teaching positions. But I don't see how it can be tied into an override (certainly not this year -- maybe for next year, though I'm not even sure how that contract gets written!). And I have no idea whether the incoming superintendent would be willing to make such a gesture. I hear the "too many administrators" comment all the time. So, either we DO have too many, or we do NOT -- but this is another area in which perception matters (and I think some comparison to other districts would be valuable - which I think perhaps Rick Hood has offered to do!).
My responses:
Anonymous 9:42 - I totally agree with your post ... and I'm so glad to hear you say you love your job! Now, what if wage concessions were tied to keeping more teachers, so class sizes would be smaller? Does that make it somewhat easier -- so that you don't take the hit of less pay and larger classes simultaneously?
Anonymous 10;04 - I'm trying to find the answer to this question -- will post when I get it.
Anonymous 10:35 - OK ... but can you be more specific?!?
I'm not really sure of your point here ... our salaries are in line with (actually higher than) local districts, and I don't think comparing salaries to the eastern part of the state makes sense
Intersting. The I would hope that you stop comparing Amherst to Brookline and Newton in other ways too. Thank you.
Anonymous 12:00 - are you a teacher? Would you find a reimbursement for educational classes (like towards a masters) useful? Would other teachers?
What do you think Catherine? Sheesh, this is a no-brainer.
Anon 6:55 wrote;
"Intersting. The I would hope that you stop comparing Amherst to Brookline and Newton in other ways too. Thank you."
This is silly beyond belief. Do you really think that because the cost of living in the Boston metro area is higher than here and so teachers earn more there we cannot have the same 9th grade science curriculum as they do? Is that really what you're saying?
I have never heard in a single discussion on curricula in Amherst that we cannot afford to do what Brookline and Newton do -- until now.
Are you saying if our teachers got 10% raises they would suddenly be better teachers? That's pretty insulting to our teachers. Are you saying that a 10% raise would encourage them to teach more AP classes? Also, an odd idea.
This idea is totally new and frankly silly.
"Teachers in this district are under heavy fire right now from the school committee" -- can you explain what this means? For the life of me, I'm trying to understand how asking for evidence-based decision-making or evaluation is "coming under fire."
Its about cumulative effects.
It means, calls by the chair of the SC for salary concessions (after years of 1% raises and helping to bail out the health care trust fund, which all added up to a pay CUT) while ignoring the health care concessions just made that will save the district $280,000.
The comittee is trying to micro manage the curriculum in several schools, questioning the dedication of the districts' teacher's in crafting innovative curriculum (the science course in 9th grade). Your politically motivated survey. (Lets call it like it is. And if you choose to respond to this whole post, please try not not make your post all about this single issue. See my first point.)
The repeated suggestion (or insinuation) that the teachers are responsible for saving more of their colleagues jobs. The community turned down the over-ride. Well, now the schools are in trouble. And suddenly its suggested that its the teachers' fault.
The cumulative effects of all this is not a morale booster! It is taking time and sapping the emotional energy of much of the staff.
"Intersting. The I would hope that you stop comparing Amherst to Brookline and Newton in other ways too. Thank you."
This is silly beyond belief. Do you really think that because the cost of living in the Boston metro area is higher than here and so teachers earn more there we cannot have the same 9th grade science curriculum as they do? Is that really what you're saying?
I have never heard in a single discussion on curricula in Amherst that we cannot afford to do what Brookline and Newton do -- until now.
Are you saying if our teachers got 10% raises they would suddenly be better teachers? That's pretty insulting to our teachers. Are you saying that a 10% raise would encourage them to teach more AP classes? Also, an odd idea.
This idea is totally new and frankly silly."
Well the way YOU paint it certainly tries to make it seem silly. Money issues are suddenly silly? In this budget climate? Please.
Anon 7:45 wrote:
"Well the way YOU paint it certainly tries to make it seem silly. Money issues are suddenly silly? In this budget climate? Please."
The post was about higher teacher salaries in the Boston metro area because of the higher cost of living there. Catherine even noted that her husband makes less (than colleagues in Boston) as an attorney for the state because he's in the Springfield office.
So, stick with me here, THE CONVERSATION WAS ONLY ABOUT TEACHER SALARIES AND COST OF LIVING DUE TO PROXIMITY TO BOSTON.
The fact of higher salaries in the Boston area was then used to critique people like me who want to know WHY OUR CURRICULUM IS SO DIFFERENT FROM THOSE IN NEWTON AND BROOKLINE.
(Excuse the caps, I can't use hand puppets on the web.)
I then asked HOW DO TEACHER SALARIES REFLECT DEBATES ABOUT WHAT OUR TEACHERS TEACH IN AMHERST vs. WHAT TEACHERS TEACH IN NEWTON AND BROOKLINE?
Then you responded by saying that of course money issues matter because of the budget crisis.
These are two different issues, but let me state it as clearly as I can:
HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENT CURRICULA FROM BEFORE THE CURRENT BUDGET CRISIS?
If it's all about salaries, you seem to be saying 1) our teachers would be better teachers if we paid them 10% more; or, 2) 10% higher salaries would attract better teachers.
I reject both as HIGHLY INSULTING TO OUR EXCELLENT TEACHERS.
Sorry Joel, I shouldn't have been so flip in my responses. They were therefor vague and confusing.
(That said, I am curious to know what your favorite style of hand puppets would be? Once the dust settles on all these issues maybe a satirical puppet show can be put on to help everyone laugh a little bit. God knows we need to recharge our collective sense of humour in this town- but that is going a bit off track.)
Brookline and Newton's budgets are bigger, as suggested by what they pay their teachers. Brookline and Newton have a more homogenous student body. (In terms of class i.e. the financial situation of their families, otherwise they couldn't live in those towns!)
There are challenges teaching in a district like Amherst that you won't find in Brookline and Newton. We have a much higher percentage of at risk students. The 9th grade curriculum, math extentions, etc, are excellent ways to lift up this population academically while offering a rigorous course of science for everyone. The science teachers in town ARE excellent, they know OUR student body, and have some very innovative ideas to solve challenges that Brookline and Newton do not have to concern them selves with. Brookline can stick with the status quo and their students will do just fine.
That was really the only issue I was addressing.
Joel,
I can give you an example of how the resources of Brookline and Newton and other eastern Mass towns make a difference in curriculum. It's not related to teacher salaries, but to the positions they can afford to fund.
Both Brookline and Newton have what we call "reform" curricula for elementary math, as does Amherst. To properly implement a reform curriculum requires a lot of professional development because teachers need to learn to think about math in a new way. In-class coaches are also a very important ingredient to an effective implementation. Just as we were starting to get some momentum going on implementation of our reform curriculum, we now know that we are going to lose most of our math coaches next year as well as central office support around curriculum. That is a huge loss.
Also, other districts do a lot more to pay for courses and conferences for teachers. That, too, has an impact on curriculum.
Nina, can you confirm my previous post's claim that there are more at risk students in Amherst than in Brookline and Newton, say, as a percentatge of the population?
That is my perception, but you are obviously in a better position to comment.
Nina & Anon,
I do hope you understand that I fully support the idea of paying our teachers as much as possible. Moreover, I fear that we have spent a lot of money on frills and unnecessary programs at the expense of teacher wages and benefits.
Thanks for the examples of how costs affect curriculum. Sadly, none of that was discussed in public at SC meetings. I wonder, for example, if the new and admittedly controversial (which is not to say bad, but it did cause controversy) 9th grade science curriculum cost the district extra money. I was at the SC meetings at which it was discussed and no one, not the principal, not the SC, and not the HS science teachers, raised the issue of potential and real added costs. I fear we've done a lot of things in Amherst without any reference to what they cost.
My hope is that we use the budget crisis to examine closely what we're spending money on and how that impacts our single most important "cost": Teacher salaries and benefits.
The MM trailers are a good example. I'm told some sort of ceramics studio was put in the HS, etc., etc. A lot of spending was done without any sense of the long-term implications of what seems to me to be waste.
At the risk of throwing gas on the flames, I can say I supported closing MM because I saw the administrative savings of doing that as being available to save teaching positions.
I think many, many of our teachers in town are on the same page as a lot of ACE parents. We want to focus on education for all students and excellent -- dare I use that word -- teachers are the first and most important part of that.
I don't think you guys should give up your raises. We did in the MSP, but future raises are tied to future STATE budgets, and aren't hamstrung by property taxes. I think more people in town should hear about past give-backs and below inflation raises so that they can understand why you are entitled to the negotiated raises.
One more thing about money for now. I supported the override and put my name on the ad in the Bulletin for it. BUT, I think it's a mistake to assume that the SC and Super would have spent all that money on teachers. There seem to be a lot of pet programs that eat up money long before it gets to teachers.
And the hand puppet comment is from dealing with sleepy undergrads at UMass. I threaten to use them when they're too busy texting to follow my instructions about the papers.
I believe that Brookline has an even more diverse student population than we do, in economic and racial terms.
My responses:
Anonymous 6:55 - I think you are making a silly point here. Kids in Amherst are going to attend colleges with kids who attend high school in Brookline and Newton (and Deerfield and so on). We therefore need to make sure our kids have the same opportunities. Teacher salaries, like all salaries, are driven in part by location and cost of living. Professors at Amherst College get paid SUBSTANTIALLY less than teachers at Wellsley College -- not because Amherst is considered worse, or because we don't compare ourselves to Wellsley, but because it is cheaper to live here. That's it.
Anonymous 7:15 - OK ... sorry to be an idiot .. but is this something that all teachers want? Most? How much does it cost? Again, give me some information on how desirable this would be (I mean, would it be better than higher raises, or would it be a recruiting tool for teachers, etc.)? Just help me out a bit here with actual information.
Joel - exactly. Thank you!
Anonymous 7:36 - Thank you for clarifying your "under fire" point. Let me clarify a few things in return. First, I'm the only SC member (to my knowledge) with a blog -- and I did NOT, and have not, asked the teachers to make salary concessions. Second, I don't see asking for data and evalation as micro-managing -- I see it as responsible decision-making and use of resources. I am sorry that you see wanting actual results (does the new 9th grade science curriculum achieve the goals it was intended to do? does extensions meet the goals it was intended to do? does the trimester system meet the goals it was intended to do?) as micro-managing -- and I guess you would prefer a system in which we said to teachers "do whatever you want, and we'll just trust that you are always right!" I see that as irresponsible on behalf of the SC -- as I see collecting data on what parents and teachers/staff think about our schools (how is that politically motivated? this survey could EASILY show that everyone is totally happy and I'm just a negative, gloomy person). Third, google "Amherst Plan" -- you'll see my name on the list of supporters, and you'll see my name in a letter to the Bulletin. I was one of the key organizers of this override campaign.
My responses:
(I'm not going to get involved in the debate between Anonymous and Joel)
Anonymous 9:01 - First, I agree that Brookline and Newton have more money, and more homogenous student bodyies. That is a reasonable and fair point. However, you then state that "The 9th grade curriculum, math extentions, etc, are excellent ways to lift up this population academically while offering a rigorous course of science for everyone." This is your opinion, and you might be right. But this is NOT a factually-based statement -- hence the need for data! There are many districts that are MORE diverse than ours ... and they are NOT doing 9th grade ecology and 7th grade extensions (and we have to assume they also have good and caring teachers). Again, this is why I wish we were committed to really evaluating our programs -- so that we could see whether your very strong statement (these are excellent programs) are indeed accurate (because even smart, thoughtful, caring people can sometimes be wrong). Other districts meet the challenges of working with diverse populations differently than does Amherst ... perhaps we could look to what those districts are doing, instead of simply creating innovative (and unproven) programs and curricula?
Nina - I'm confused by your post ... since neither Brookline nor Newton use our elementary math curriculum. We use Investigations, and there is actually no research supporting the effectiveness of this curriculum. Brookline uses Think Math!, and Newton uses Everyday Math -- both of these curriculum are supported through research studies. Thus, it seems like particularly in a time of budget cuts, we'd need to be making sure we are using empirically-validated programs!
I do agree that we need more professional development funding -- I hear that AEF might be willing to assist with some of this, and the SC needs to continue to push for maintaing some funds in this area (which is hard, in the midst of all the cuts).
Anonymous 9:42 - Brookline and Newton are less diverse. Here are the numbers: Amherst is 17% low income (regional district), 69.6% White, 9.2% Asian, 8.4% African American, and 8.7% Hispanic. Brookline is 10% low income, 62% White, 18% Asian, 8.1% African American, and 8.6% Hispanic. Newton is 7% low income, 70.7% White, 13.6% Asian, 4.8% African American, and 6.5% Hispanic.
Joel - I agree with all you said. Thanks.
Anonymous 10:26 - Amherst is actually more diverse (see my response earlier). But again, what are we making the case for here? That low income kids can't do AP chemistry, or 9th grade biology, or 8th grade algebra? I just think it is a pretty slippery slope to say "well, our kids are poorer, so they can't do more rigorous work." If our kids (ANY kids, regardless of income) are lacking skills in a given area (reading, math), we need to find ways to bring these kids up to speed. But simply assuming that low income kids aren't going to be able to succeed in or benefit from a more traditional curricula (e.g., like Brookline, Newton, etc.) seems wrong.
To describe the many extra administrative positions I have seen pop out of nowhere in a ten year period....assitant principals for a beginning... Each school had one principal and only one. Outreach (teacher)--I saw the person who held this position in an elementary school interact with a kid exactly one time the whole school year. Theraputic (teachers) sometimes a kid has three or five of these on their tail. Assistant to the administrators--makes you wonder what work the assistant has to do that makes up for what the administrator isn't doing in the first place...
The special education department had exactly one person running the program--now I believe there are five, if not six....believe me, I know this work is needed to keep our schools strong, but I strongly believe that the more time goes by the more positions become created and the more money is being used to keep these positions going. And the work of the classroom teacher becomes more and more demanding and the sorry end result is the child who graduates high school and cannot read. And yes--I know this child personally!
Dear Anon 4:59. I think your timeline is a bit off. Fort River (where my kids went to school) had an assistant principal when they were there. And my kids are now 30, 28 and 25. At that time there were at least 3 SPED administrators also and possibly 4. And there were therapeutic teachers around then too. I do not know the timeline for adding assistant principles to the other schools.
Catherine,
What I said is that Newton and Brookline both use a reform math curriculum, as do we. If you recheck my post you will see that I didn't say that we use the same curriculum as they do, just the same type. In places that are having math wars, like Washington State, Investigations and Everyday Math are looked at in the same way. Both represent significant departures from the traditional curriculum.
The reform curricula, as a group, require significant professional development. Joel had asked for an example where additional resources should make a difference in curriculum (or I thought that was what he was asking for), so I gave him the example of math coaches. The math coaches are just as important in Newton as they are here. The difference is that Newton can afford them.
By the way, your statement about the Investigations curriculum is not true. I understand that you went to the "What Works" site and didn't find any studies listed that met the research protocol of that site. That doesn't mean the studies don't exist; it just means the existing studies didn't meet the protocol. Impact doesn't have any studies on that site, either. Does that mean that there are no studies showing the effectiveness of Impact? No, it just means there are none on that site.
NSF funded round 2 of Investigations and they are not going to do that without research. I think NSF knows something about research. Look here and you will see both Investigations and Everyday Math listed by NSF as exemplary curricula:
Exemplary Curricula
Given our extreme budget situation, it would be an unconscionable expenditure of taxpayer money to switch from one reform curriculum to another, when both of them have implementation challenges.
I think this is an example of the micro-managing issue that someone brought up. It would be appropriate for the school committee to establish policy, such as a formal adoption of the NCTM standards. I would like to see that. It would then be up to us to find a standards-based curriculum, because that would be in accordance with school committee policy. Yet you seem interested in picking books for us. If you are going to have strong opinions at that level, then you need to be more informed about things like reform math because you don't seem to fully appreciate the issues. There's a lot more to it than just looking up which curriculum is the best. That's where the dialogue piece comes in.
I'm glad to hear that you visited the middle school. Perhaps you can do a post on what you learned there.
Nina - read my post ... I never said "and we should use these." I said these schools are using OTHER curricula, as they are. And when we chose to pick up the newest version of Investigations, we did so without reviewing any other textbooks or considering other options. This is NOT the norm in other districts, which was my point. We might be using the VERY best elementary school math curricula around ... just like we might have the best 9th grade science program in the country and like we might have the best approach (extensions) to getting kids ready for 8th grade algebra. But until we've tested how well these curricula work (e.g., is Investigations the right curricula for our district?), I'm not going to assume a particular approach is necessarily the best. I have no interest in picking textbooks and have never done so -- I don't even know what this refers to. But I have a strong interest in making sure that the decisions we make IN OUR DISTRICT are made using data, and are evaluated.
And one more point ... given the current state of the budget, we might well need to consider whether we can afford any math curricula that involves extensive coaching. That may turn out to be luxury we can't afford -- and that at least should be on the table.
well, Catherine, I do remember a blog post where you said that you hoped that Maria would pick Impact for the 6th grade and another where you said you were happy it had been picked for the middle school. That is the kind of statement I am referring to. And if you look above where you discuss Everyday Math and Think Math, the implication is that you would prefer one of those.
I know, I know, it's all about the research, but it seems like you find research to support the thing you want, which typically comes from Newton or Brookline.
It's not like research provides one clear answer. I can find research to say that Saxon is good or research to say that Saxon is terrible. Come to think of it, are we supposed to be eating oat bran still or did that research end up changing?
Nina - sorry, I should have been clearer. First, I was very glad that Maria picked Impact for 6th grade GIVEN THAT WE HAD ALREADY PICKED IMPACT for 7th and 8th. It was not a choice of Impact for 6th grade or another textbook -- it was a choice of Impact (to feed into 7th/8th math) or NO textbook! So, yes, I think a better preparation for all kids leading into Impact 2 is Impact 1 as opposed to each teacher in each of the 7 different schools using a somewhat different set of combined materials. I think this standardization (horizontal alignment in all elementary schools) and vertical alignment (Impact 1 to 2 to 3) is great for our district (and great for MS math in particular). But I didn't care about Impact per se -- I cared about the choice of a consistent textbook that would provide such alignment (and Brookline actually uses something called "Mathscape," not Impact, in 6 to 8).
The math curriculum for our MS(Impact) was chosen by a committee of teachers/staff. I wasn't on the committee -- no parents were. That committee (led by Mike Hayes) reviewed various books, narrowed it down to three books (Impact and two others -- maybe CMP and Holt, but I could be wrong), and then got feedback from parents and others. They then chose the book (and Jere Hochman last March set choosing textbooks for 6th to 8th math as a district priority). Again, I had nothing to do with (a) setting a priority of getting a textbook for 6th to 8th math (his recommendation was given PRIOR to my election to the SC, and (b) what textbook was chosen (that was entirely up to math teachers/staff). I guess I would have to say that this was a thoughtful and thorough process by math educators in our district -- which is EXACTLY how I think we should be making decisions! This is not a process in which a SC member "chose" a textbook in any way, which is what your post implied.
I do think research is important -- and that is how many districts make decisions about textbooks (and other things). If you've seen research showing Investigations is an effective elementary school math curriculum, please post it on my blog -- I haven't been able to find anything proving that (and NSF funds many things in order to figure out if promising things actually work -- that is the nature of the grant process ... that is NOT the same as demonstrating effectiveness).
Amherst is actually more diverse (see my response earlier). But again, what are we making the case for here? That low income kids can't do AP chemistry, or 9th grade biology, or 8th grade algebra? I just think it is a pretty slippery slope to say "well, our kids are poorer, so they can't do more rigorous work." If our kids (ANY kids, regardless of income) are lacking skills in a given area (reading, math), we need to find ways to bring these kids up to speed. But simply assuming that low income kids aren't going to be able to succeed in or benefit from a more traditional curricula (e.g., like Brookline, Newton, etc.) seems wrong.
What you suggest IS wrong. The point was that the teachers in Amherst have worked hard to create curriculum that meets the needs of OUR at risk students by
#1 The new 9th grade Sciece Curriculum
and
#2 the MS math extentions (as well as the extention in other courses).
Our towns teachers have put together an innovatinve curriculum to help at risk students succees while providing challenge work for higher performing students all of whom are in the same class! Why don't we all take a deep breath and give these methods a chance to succeed instead of getting in the way with premature scrutiny and dispalyed lack of faith in the ability of our teachers.
Anonymous 8:05 - these may well be excellent courses/programs that do exactly what you say. That's why I really wish we were evaluating them, so we could actually test that, and not just assume they are working (since sometimes things that we hope work actually do not). That is my whole point - and I don't see that as doubting the ability of our teachers -- good, smart, thoughtful people can be wrong -- it happens). Again, the only way to actually know whether these approaches are good is to evaluate them -- many other districts with similar populations to ours are using different approaches to teaching math/science (and these districts might also have thoughtful, smart, caring teachers, right?).
To anon@805
I really hope that our math curricula work, including extensions. But I would like to actually KNOW that they work. This seems like an experiment, one where one does the experiment, but doesn't collect the data or form conclusions (BASED on the date).
Of all the subjects, math seems to be the one that is the simplest to track progress (or regression). It seems that a year's worth of students is a reasonable sample size. A few years comparing student scores (before vs after extensions) on standardized tests ought to provide us with some important information.
I admit the extensions program *seems* iffy to me but my family has yet to experience it first hand. Maybe it is working really well for kids (and all this worry is misplaced). But if the teachers are going to do an experiment on our kids (i.e. trying new curricula), then it ought to be complete (i.e. data collection and analysis).
The iffy bit comes from my impression (and someone correct me if I am wrong) that a functioning system had existed that included precalc (i.e. tracking). "Tracking" is evil in Amherst. So to replace this precalc course, we switched to extensions, which consists largely of self-motivated learning outside the classroom (i.e. homework).
Was there a problem with the previous pre-calc course? If this is about right (again I welcome correction- really) it doesn't seem very progressive. The math teachers that receive students having gone through extensions ought to have an idea about whether their students are as prepared as those previously.
Post a Comment