|
An Important Message From the Superintendent: On
January 25, 2005 the Rock Island-Milan Board voted to Close Grant
School and reconstitute Hawthorne Irving and Lincoln as Prek-2 and Gr.
3-6 sister schools. There will be one boundary encompassing the three
(current) schools. Hawthorne Irving will become Rock Island Primary
Academy and
Former principal, Sheila Wildermuth, has been named as project coordinator. She has already begun working on details of the Full Service Component of the schools and is doing further research on the 90-90-90 Schools Components.
We are excited to announce the following appointments for the newly restructured schools:
Ms. Lucille McCorkle, Principal of the Primary Academy located at Hawthorne-Irving Elementary School.
Mr. Mike Russell, Principal of the Intermediate Academy located at Lincoln Elementary School.
Former principal, Ms. Sheila Wildermuth, will work part time as School
Improvement Project Coordinator (using funding from a state grant,
through the ROE (Regional Office of Education). School Closing and Restructuring Study
Rock Island-Milan District #41 Rick Loy Superintendent, Rock Island-Milan Schools In continuous pursuit of Excellence Every Day
These are challenging times for Rock Island-Milan Schools. Because of declining enrollments and aging buildings we are looking into the closing of schools. At the same time NCLB (No Child Left Behind) sanctions have had profound impact on three of our schools. The following is an explanation of how District #41 will take on these challenges to create a plan that results in better learning opportunities for our students.
Too Many Schools
On September 28th, the Facilities Study Task Force made an extensive list of findings and recommendations to the Board of Education. Their first finding was that we have too many schools. This came as no surprise to the Board and Administration, as we have seen a steady decline in student enrollment over the past 30 years. In fact, district enrollment has declined from 11,502 in 1971, to 6,582 in 2004, a 43% drop.
In 1971 we averaged just under 500 students per school in our 13 elementary schools. We currently have 12 elementary schools, averaging less than 300 students per school. A few of our schools are quite small in enrollment, including schools with 116, 196, 212, and 222 students.
In times of zero to minimal funding growth from the State of Illinois the district is finding it difficult to operate a balanced budget while meeting students’ needs. The majority of State funding is based on student attendance. As a result of our large decline in enrollment, we are receiving less financial support from the State.
Small schools are more expensive to operate, per child, than larger schools. In some instances we spend twice as much money per student in our smaller schools. Overhead to operate an elementary school is somewhere between $250,000 and $275,000, no matter if the school has 116 students (our smallest elementary school) or 413 students (our largest elementary school).
Small schools (schools under 300) also have part time itinerant staff (P.E., music teacher, nurse, speech clinician) and struggle with balanced class sizes, some too small (currently a class with 14), some too large (currently a class with 30). In many instances there is only one teacher for each grade level, making grade level teacher collaboration difficult at best.
The administration reviewed and analyzed the Facilities Study Task Force finding that we have too many schools, and agree with this finding.
Feasibility of Facility Study Recommendations
Under the direction of the Board of Education, the administration put together a tight timeline and action plan to conduct its own study as to the feasibility of these recommendations. This timeline is available on the district web site, http://www.risd41.org . As we implement our plan of action we are giving careful consideration to both the long and sort range recommendations made by the Facilities Study Committee.
Another factor being carefully considered in this study is determining how to proceed with NCLB’s (No Child Left Behind) upcoming sanctions. As a result of not making AYP (Annual Yearly Progress) for multiple years, Lincoln, Hawthorne-Irving and Grant Schools are on the NCLB Watch List. All must offer “choice” for their students. It is also apparent that Hawthorne-Irving and Grant programs will need to be restructured next year. The 2004 state test scores at Hawthorne-Irving and Grant were both well under the state mandated 40% “Meets” in Reading and Math. Lincoln’s scores increased, with over 50% “Meets” in Reading, and an overall score just under the 40% mandate, at 39.6%. This data is an important part of our study as we move forward in determining which school(s) to close or restructure. (Note: to the Superintendent, restructure means to close down and re-open with a major change in curricular structure and personnel.)
A critical piece of the administration’s study is conducting research to guide the restructuring of our schools on the State Watch List. Our Instruction and School Improvement Department has been gathering information and best practices about successful schools that reflect similar demographics of the schools that will be restructured. The most noted study found to date is the 90-90-90 Schools research. These are schools that are 90% low income, 90% minority and achieving at a 90% success rate on State tests. In addition, we are studying methods to close the academic achievement gap and effectively teach a diverse student population. More information on this subject can be found on the District web site, http://www.risd41.org . Users can select the link titled Academic Excellence Framework (AEF) that contains numerous links to research that outlines our long-range plan to help all students achieve at high levels.
Based on careful review and analysis of enrollment scenarios, best practices research and inputs/feedback from staff and community members, scenarios are being developed and discussed by the District’s Leadership Team (Principals and Assistant Superintendents) and the Superintendent’s Advisory Task Force. The latter consists of 20 members, including 4 administrators, 4 teachers and 12 community members. Their charge is to review an array of possible school closing and restructuring scenarios to determine which scenario would most positively impact students. The recommendations of these two groups will be given strong consideration by the Superintendent.
As we move forward in this study, information received from September 28th through early January is being analyzed. Being considered is input from: the 12 meetings with staff and parents at the three AYP schools; public forum; pastors’ meeting; Superintendent’s Communication Council; city officials; enrollment scenarios, and letters from parents, teachers and concerned citizens. Results of the belief survey, given to 275 people, and various survey/questionnaires are also important sources of information and data being considered. Finally, the looming implications of NCLB are a major piece of this puzzle that must be weighed.
The Decision Making Process
As we proceed in our analysis of potential changes in our schools, we embrace the District’s Vision, Mission and Core Values, as these are the driving forces that lay the foundation for all decisions made regarding the future of our schools.
Vision: Excellence Every Day
Mission: To increase the academic performance of all students in all schools.
Core Values: Collaboration, Continuous Improvement, Customer Satisfaction, Data Driven Decision Decisions and Empowerment with Responsibility.
Every decision we make is in the spirit of our five Core Value “practices.” This is why the study includes holding over 30 meetings with various stakeholders and analyzing numerous enrollment scenarios to determine where to assign students in the schools recommended for closing.
On November 30th, the administration finished the initial study as to the feasibility of closing two schools, Lincoln and Grant, at the end of this school year. The study included conducting an array of enrollment scenarios, utilizing GIS (Geographic Information System) software. It showed where the students from Lincoln and Grant would move and how students from other schools must be moved in order to make this recommendation feasible for next year. To make this work, we would have to adjust boundaries involving numerous schools.
Finding: The administration does not believe it can effectively close two schools by next year and still meet the needs of the affected students. The enrollment analysis does indicate one school can be effectively closed next year while still meeting students’ needs. It is highly likely the Superintendent will recommend closing one school next year.
Restructuring
Test scores at two of our “watch list” schools continue to decline. The schools have benefited from increased funding through various grants. These funds have been utilized to implement numerous intervention programs such as: Reading First, America’s Choice, Lights on for Learning, Supplemental Educational Services, HOSTS, Reading Recovery and additional staff. Community and business volunteers have been supportive resources. Specific changes in the curriculum, numerous assessments and extensive staff development have been ongoing. Still, the scores continue to move in the wrong direction and the achievement gap is widening.
Despite tremendous efforts at these schools by the staff and administration results continue to be unacceptable. A sense of urgency prevails. If drastic change is to occur, drastic action must be taken. It is time to restructure some of our schools. We can and will do better for our children!
Restructuring scenarios are currently being developed and studied by the Superintendent’s Advisory Task Force and the District Leadership Team. The staff and communities at the three “watch list” schools are also looking into possible restructuring scenarios. Each scenario developed will be carefully analyzed as recommendations are made to the Superintendent in mid and late December. This information will then be reviewed with the Cabinet (Superintendent and the assistant Superintendents) to determine from a district perspective which scenario best meets students’ needs.
Recommendations for Change
Finally, on January 11th or January 25th, the Superintendent will present a summary of this study to the Board along with a recommendation. This recommendation will likely include which school to close for next year and specifics on how we will restructure our “watch list” schools.
Once this study is completed and action is taken, the administration will then place its focus on developing a detailed agenda for the start of the 2005-06 year. Parallel to the implementation a study will begin in earnest to develop a comprehensive long-range plan for the closing and/or restructuring of additional schools.
Rock Island-Milan stakeholders, we value your input. If you have any suggestions or points of concern you would like to communicate, please e-mail me at rick.loy@risd41.org.
“Our dilemma is that we hate change and love it at the same time. What we really want is for things to remain the same but we get better.”
Sydney Harris, journalist
You are visitor number
This Page was last update: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 at 3:25:06 PM This site is using the RISD41 theme.
|
|
