Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, March 26, 2010 | 12:50 p.m.
Year-Round Elementary Schools Converting to Nine-Month Calendar 2010-11
- Beatty
- Brookman
- Cahlan
- Carl
- Cortez
- Crestwood
- Diaz
- Diskin
- Edwards
- Frias
- Gragson
- Hayden
- Hickey
- Hummel
- Lamping
- Moore
- Petersen
- Smith (Hal)
- Steele
- Tartan
- Watson
Citing concerns about the potential impact to students, families and staff, the Clark County School Board voted today to hold off on converting all 76 year-round elementary campuses to nine-month calendars as a cost-savings measure.
Under the existing district policy for triggering calendar conversions, 21 schools are set to move to nine-month schedules beginning in August. Those plans will proceed, saving the district an estimated $5.5 million.
Had the School Board approved sidestepping its own policies and allowed all 76 schools to make the switch, the savings would have been about $15 to $20 million. The district needs to trim $123 million from its operating budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
But the potential harm to student learning and the negative impact on some campus communities was too high a price for School Board members. Support employees at year-round schools face a cut in pay if they are moved to a nine-month schedule, as do some licensed personnel in specialist positions.
The vote to maintain the current policy was 4-3, with members Chris Garvey, Larry Mason, Sheila Moulton and Linda Young in support.
Opposing the motion were School Board President Terri Janison, Vice President Carolyn Edwards and member Deanna Wright, who wanted to give schools more flexibility than the current policy allows.
Edwards said the district should be looking at the downturn in enrollment (expected to drop this fall for a second consecutive year) as an opportunity. She recommended expanding the guidelines to give campuses more of a chance to make the calendar switch if it’s logistically reasonable, even if the current regulation’s “triggers” aren’t met.
“I don’t see why it has to be all or nothing,” Edwards said. “We can be a little bit in between here. There are schools that can come off (the year-round calendar) and want to come off. For those that it’s really a struggle, they can stay on.”
During Thursday’s meeting, which was continued to this morning for the vote, members heard from several constituencies that opposed the change, including staff and parents.
Many of the year-round schools serve high numbers of minority students from low-income households. Principals and teachers told School Board members they feared student achievement would suffer if at-risk students had a long summer break from learning, rather than the year-round schedule’s shorter track breaks. Some national studies have suggested that English language learners (who account for about 19 percent of Clark County’s student enrollment) do better following a year-round calendar.
<<Some national studies have suggested that English language learners (who account for about 19 percent of Clark County's student enrollment) do better following a year-round calendar.>>
AND let's not forget the built in babysitting service the schools provide and the parents depend on. OR the fact that a good majority of these ELLs are from ILLEGAL parentage. Just think of all the money that could be saved at ALL levels of society if the gov't enforced immigration laws. oh happy day that would be....
I don't know what incompetence leads the Sun to keep printing this, but the vast majority of year round teachers get paid THE SAME as 9 month teachers. No one will lose money by switching to nine-month status except for the handful of specialists (library, music, etc.) at each school who teach more than 180 days.
Most teachers want to move to nine-month status. It allows elementary students to have the same days off as their older sibilings in middle school and high school. It simplifies the state testing calendar. Most importantly, it saves MILLIONS of dollars. Now the district will have to find another 15 million dollars to cut. What will it be? Big salary cuts? 300+ more teachers laid off?
I guess the omniscient board members thought Johnny and Jose would be better off in a class of 35+ students due to lack of staffing than with the summer break that the vast majority of students, including ELL students, already enjoy.
Hey, I'll work 9 months for the reduced pay......
I've taught at year round and 9 month schools. The ELL population in my classrooms did better on a 9 month schedule.
My kids are in year-round "tracks" and I hate it. It seems like they are always on some two or three week vacation after being in school for only a couple weeks, and the homework always lightens significantly before a track break.
Plus, we just got rezoned for no good reason while enrollments are shrinking. To think they would disrupt families with rezoning amidst all the other economic troubles. Disgusting.
I am very displeased with CCSD.
While there may be some truth to the possible benefits for ELL students or other 'high risk' groups, these are not factors that are part of the policy for determining school calendar so they should not have even been mentioned by the Board. If the Board would like to re-write the policy to address those issues, they may do that I suppose, but currently, the only issue addressed by the policy is capacity and an implication that there is 'savings' associated with the year-round calendar which we now know to be false. The Board is wrong in this decision and the alternative will likely mean unnecessary layoffs. This proposal would have saved $20 million without costing a single job. Where is the accountability??
Is there a way to get petitions to put 9 month schools on the ballot? I do not have factual information but it seems as though the majority of parents I talk to wish for 9 month schools.