Budget Time

As we approach budget time, it is interesting to see the outside opinions of the board's actions. State officials are prodding for lower spending (and ignoring the inflexible increases of contractual raises for teachers and higher health costs), parents feel threatened by almost any change in staffing, and school employees believe any job cut will hurt the education of children. What is most interesting to me is what I believe is the complete integrity of board members in acting with all good will to do what is best educationally without the emotional sidelights of vested interests. In looking at the shrinking size of the school and the consequent shrinking size of classes, my feeling is that as class size gets too small, you actually hurt educational quality and the experience of children. My standard example is a class size of 10-12, with maybe 3 girls and 9 boys. Let's say 1 girl is above grade level and another girl is way below grade level. The 3rd girl is absent, and who does either girl have to fit in with that day? This problem is extended in all sorts of ways in terms of academic and social learning for all sorts of kids. And although individual attention sounds good on the surface, it is possible to almost know kids too well, as teachers try to individualize expectations so much that one kid is expected to do a little less than another, and another a lot less and another more....Sometimes it may help to have reasonably high expectations for every kid and hold these relatively steady to try to raise all kids to this level, without adjusting expectations for each child in a small group. And yes, there can be classes that are too big and standardized education is problematic, but neither of these are likely to be the problems at Westminster Schools any time in the near future. One other problem I think may occur is having too many adults in a classroom for the number of kids. Again, it always seems more adults in the classroom are always better, but this is not always true. Different adults send different messages for kids, making it hard to be consistent. There is the old problem of going from mom to dad to get an answer a kid desires. And the teacher must spend time to communicate with other adults in the class about tasks, responsibilities, and expectations that might be a net gain when all works out but can be a frustration when teaching styles and belief systems don't coincide. Given all these factors of class size, I, and I believe the other board members, were led to look at reducing staff in a way that resulted in a more educationally optimal class size of somewhere nearer 14-18 (still small by any national measure (and minuscule by international comparisons where class sizes can reach near 3 digits in some places!). While it turns out this also lowers costs was incidental (and, admittedly, a valued bonus), budget was in no way a driving force for any board member that I saw. Once the numbers were crunched, then the real hard part came where it is emotionally wrenching to reduce staff. No matter who the person, it hurts to take away a person's livelihood. Schools cannot be employment agencies just keeping people on when not needed, but both causing someone to lose their source of income and having someone leave the school community is really hard, even if totally justified. Then there are what seem really non-sensical rules about who is laid off based on nothing to do with teacher quality and exclusively based on when someone was hired. Although a very experienced teacher may have lost their energy for teaching, their position is guaranteed while the younger, in many cases more energetic teachers, are the first to be let go. In the case of Westminster, there may not be these exact circumstances, but to have this as the general and inflexible rule in schools can really work against what is best for kids in terms of keeping the most effective teachers. Now that staffing numbers are more clear based on class size, now comes the other tough decision about how to configure classes and the issue of the West School. It seems many are jumping to assumptions about what will happen, and in classical psychological fashion, we all tend to focus more on the downside losses than the upside gains. There are lots of potential configurations that can encourage attention to individual children, continuity of programs, connection of families to the school, and developmentally appropriate education. This is being worked on by the teachers and I hope they can look at what is best for the kids even if this means some changes in established patterns. As much as I liked and advocated for the mini school idea, I also think it is probably advisable to change the school structures every decade or two unless everything is working exceptionally well just to continually rethink why and how we do things. At Westminster, despite our many strong points, I am confident we can say not all is working superbly. Although we to have an admittedly challenging population in terms of demographic "risk" factors, so do lots of other schools that show better results by some measures. I am hopeful that new configurations and arrangements can promote a stronger professional community in the school, with more shared work and shared expectations, and greater continuity for all children in gaining the kinds of educational experiences in all respects that are needed to be prepared for success in school and beyond. We are a small school by almost any measure, and I believe we can keep a strong sense of community as we work together to do what is best for all kids. I believe reductions in staffing will improve educational outcomes as teachers are led to work together in new ways with attention to all kids. And, happily, we can do this while lowering educational costs, and hopefully pleasing taxpayers (and the state officials).