Comments on: Plan for Oakland schools up for approval Saturday

By: livegreen

livegreen — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 23:38:22 +0000

“Boing” should have been “Bumping”.

By: livegreen

livegreen — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 23:29:53 +0000

As I understand RBB it dictates x amount per student for all schools. Schools that have teachers with seniority pay more per teacher but get those with more experience and less turnover. Schools with junior teachers pay less per teacher but get those with less experience and higher turnover, but then have money left over to supplement and make-up for those negatives with T/As, stip-subs, PD and programs the SSCs (made up of principal, teachers AND parents) decide on.

All that of course is in a time of stability. In a time of layoffs how would both categories of schools (or those in between) be affected? Does boing work either way?

Importantly even without RBB wouldn’t Peralta and schools like it still have a budget cut? Then wouldn’t they still lose a teacher either to retirement or to bumping to a school that had to lay off a less experienced junior teacher?

By: cesar

cesar — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:10:24 +0000

Hello–there is a WAIT LIST for Peralta — negihborhood kids and Options Process folks who did all the right things – and simultaneously there is an empty classroom!

By default then, it follows that we do not really want to pull families into our schools – we want them to go private!

What’s the thinking?

By: Lisa Capuano

Lisa Capuano — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 00:34:08 +0000

Instead of money being spent to hire people directly at the school site , the district is spending 6 figures on salaries and contracts that push toward centralization. THE CHILDREN ARE AT THE SITES! Achievement is at the sites. This is disastrous.

By: Yastrzemski

Yastrzemski — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 18:25:17 +0000

@ I Love…. well guess what, OUSD doesn’t do that and the Crocker staff will have one less teacher next year (and Peralta and Sequoia). It is a reality and a shame…while other classrooms in other schools will have less than the 20:1 ratio, the schools with proven results and long waiting lists will be filled to capacity and have less staff to deal with it.

By: Craig Gordon

Craig Gordon — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:12:58 +0000

Of course the problem goes far beyond Oakland. Of course the state grossly underfunds schools and all public services, as does the federal government. But Results Based Budgeting pushes responsibility for inadequate funding down to each school site, forcing each site to “choose” which arm or leg to chop off. When staff, students, and parents at the now-closed Paul Robeson School for Visual and Performing Arts protested the total elimination its performing arts classes, district administration replied that the school itself had “chosen” that particular cut—instead of what? English, science, math, or history?

So RBB helps the district administration blame the victims and wash its hands of responsibility for its own choices: paying above-average salaries to top administration (two new associate supt. positions just added!), under-spending on teachers and support (in violation of the Ed Code’s minimum requirement), spending tens of millions on unnecessary subcontracts for private companies (including a new $742,000 contract for WestEd), and for refusing to publicly demand that corporations and the rich be taxed as much as it takes to adequately fund schools and other services students and their families need.

RBB does not “equalize funding across schools.” It penalizes schools in low-income communities where many factors lead to lower attendance rates. Meanwhile schools with higher income families are able to fill gaps with private fundraisers far more easily than others can.

By: ILoveTeachers

ILoveTeachers — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 14:23:31 +0000

RBB has nothing to do with empty classrooms – you can blame that one on the ridiculously low per-pupil funding from the state. All RBB does is equalize funding across schools. I don’t think kids in schools with low-cost teachers should have to subsidize veteran teachers across town.

Even if OUSD used a staffing formula based on contract maximums, Peralta (and Sequoia and Crocker) would still have the number of teachers it has now.

By: Turanga_teach

Turanga_teach — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 05:05:44 +0000

@Jesse James,
Whoops–hadn’t thought of that. I’m more familiar with the principal making the decision to leave (retire, switch districts, etc.) after the matching interviews had already happened. What you mention is much stickier: point taken.

By: J.R.

J.R. — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 04:14:08 +0000

Algebra,

The funny thing is that the newly implemented plan alludes to the fact that money gets siphoned off, away from the classrooms, but never gets into specifics about cutting administration(it only gives the idea vague lip service). You are right, the kids in this district are going to continue to lose big time for the sake of adults, which is status quo all the way. It’s all about the money, and those that control it(the pols and the bureaucrats) will never put kids ahead of themselves, by making personal sacrifices.

By: AlgebraTeacher

AlgebraTeacher — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 03:18:55 +0000

OUSD claims community schools, but doesn’t fund them. I worked at West Oakland Middle which is considered a community school already, but has been in debt all year and the district froze our budget 3 times. They want to base their model off of the Harlem Children Zone which has an operating budget of millions of dollars. You can’t try to drastically change things without the proper funding! I was laid off and am no longer teaching in Oakland. I wish all the best of luck with this new plan, cause you’ll need it. Too bad the priority has never been on students in this district.