APS budget is unacceptable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

Any positions where certified teachers are in an office while vacancies exist in classrooms, for one. That’s just grossly incompetent/ negligent. DEI can be one person. Content areas can have a coordinator, a supervisor, a director, or a specialist, but not all 4. I’d start there.

Disagree strongly. Experienced and knowledgeable teachers are precisely who you should have helping administer/manage a school system.

+1

There will always been the need for subs. But that’s a different resource pool than administrators. Want fewer/better subs? Improve conditions/pay for teachers and subs. The solution isn’t pulling from staff.

No way. We’ve had some vacancies for months. For months, kids in a science classroom, for one example, while there are 3 certified science educators in Syphax… supporting what? That’s a huge hell no for me. APS is in the business of teaching and learning, and teachers in classrooms are fundamental to this.

So irrational. If they don’t need 3 science admins that’s one thing. But if they do, then no, we shouldn’t be pulling subs from syphax.

The solution is to hire more long-term subs. Improve pay for teachers and subs. And reduce workload/administrative responsibilities so they don’t burnout as much.

Raise taxes to fund the schools our community needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the 2.5¢ tax Duran is asking for?

APS is very well funded already. They just WASTE those funds on unnecessary programs and positions. Get rid of Syphax bloat. Cut Outdoor Lab. Cut the 80/20 immersion program back to 50/50 if it’s more expensive. Get rid of ALL the option schools if they’re more expensive to run than neighborhood schools. FFS, get rid of iPads in K-5, switch to Chromebooks for 6-12.

Agree and disagree.
Rid the bloat - YES.

Cut relatively inexpensive programs that provide a unique and often lasting/life-changing learning experience like Outdoor Lab that are unique to APS? NO. (That goes for TJHSST, too)

80/20 immersion is only "more expensive" as they transition to the model and implement the new parts of the curriculum and provide teacher training. Once the model is established, it is no longer has the extra expense. And again, if this is an instructional model that has a notable positive impact on learning and achievement, especially for English learners and underprivileged students - and especially especially for underprivileged English learners - then NO.

Get rid of option schools that do not show a significant benefit for students v. a typical neighborhood school of similar demographics or less diverse? YES.
Get rid of option programs that are not clearly distinctive from non-option programs and any specific characteristics of which could be incorporated into every school? YES. (looking at you, MPSA, ATS, and HB)

Get rid of iPads entirely? YES YES and YES
Replace iPads 6-8 with laptops/Macbooks? YES. (But maybe not start 1:1 at all until 7th. 6th can continue with classroom sets)
Replace MacBooks with Chromebooks - POSSIBLY. I'd like to see the side-by-side comparisons in costs and security, maintenance, etc.

Im a pro-immersion person too, but you should be really careful about holding up your program as some hallmark of pedagogy. You’re not. You’re in massive flux, you just got rewritten, in part because the old model nd old locations were proving unsustainable. You literally couldn’t get the students you needed. Can it be certified? Do you have more than best practices and a mission statement to point to? By contrast, Montessori is internationally recognized as a pedagogy and certified. There are two US institutions that certify both Montessori schools and teachers. Recently there was a study about public Montessori v. traditional. The Career Center nd ArlTech programs are all run on recognized and often certified pedagogies too. Immersion is somewhere in between all of those and ATS, so be careful about volunteering criteria.

[Anonymous]

Re above post. Keep the Macbook airs. APS has invested in that technology for over a decade, and with Apple products in general long before then—since the 1980s.
Also, the WSJ did an article last year on how Chromebooks become useless paperweights after a few short years, and are hamstrung by OS limitations and lack of power. Macbook Airs remain viable and upgradable for much longer. Apple is also refreshing the product lineup with more educational laptop offerings soon.

I’d get rid of the iPads in elementary schools though, and have macbooks from grades 6 or 7 through 12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the 2.5¢ tax Duran is asking for?

APS is very well funded already. They just WASTE those funds on unnecessary programs and positions. Get rid of Syphax bloat. Cut Outdoor Lab. Cut the 80/20 immersion program back to 50/50 if it’s more expensive. Get rid of ALL the option schools if they’re more expensive to run than neighborhood schools. FFS, get rid of iPads in K-5, switch to Chromebooks for 6-12.

Agree and disagree.
Rid the bloat - YES.

Cut relatively inexpensive programs that provide a unique and often lasting/life-changing learning experience like Outdoor Lab that are unique to APS? NO. (That goes for TJHSST, too)

80/20 immersion is only "more expensive" as they transition to the model and implement the new parts of the curriculum and provide teacher training. Once the model is established, it is no longer has the extra expense. And again, if this is an instructional model that has a notable positive impact on learning and achievement, especially for English learners and underprivileged students - and especially especially for underprivileged English learners - then NO.

Get rid of option schools that do not show a significant benefit for students v. a typical neighborhood school of similar demographics or less diverse? YES.
Get rid of option programs that are not clearly distinctive from non-option programs and any specific characteristics of which could be incorporated into every school? YES. (looking at you, MPSA, ATS, and HB)

Get rid of iPads entirely? YES YES and YES
Replace iPads 6-8 with laptops/Macbooks? YES. (But maybe not start 1:1 at all until 7th. 6th can continue with classroom sets)
Replace MacBooks with Chromebooks - POSSIBLY. I'd like to see the side-by-side comparisons in costs and security, maintenance, etc.

Im a pro-immersion person too, but you should be really careful about holding up your program as some hallmark of pedagogy. You’re not. You’re in massive flux, you just got rewritten, in part because the old model nd old locations were proving unsustainable. You literally couldn’t get the students you needed. Can it be certified? Do you have more than best practices and a mission statement to point to? By contrast, Montessori is internationally recognized as a pedagogy and certified. There are two US institutions that certify both Montessori schools and teachers. Recently there was a study about public Montessori v. traditional. The Career Center nd ArlTech programs are all run on recognized and often certified pedagogies too. Immersion is somewhere in between all of those and ATS, so be careful about volunteering criteria.

My "program" was our assigned Title I neighborhood schools from K to 12.
A general study about public Montessori v. private Montessori doesn't justify or prove the performance of MPSA v. other APS schools specifically. I don't care that Montessori is a "certifiable" program. So is IB, and I wouldn't have any issues reconsidering the overall value to the current and near future Arlington school system of that and eliminating those (minimally at the elementary and middle school level) either. I have no doubts about the validity of immersion pedagogies, "certified" program or not. APS is not just throwing students and teachers who speak Spanish into a school and calling it immersion. Their instructional models are based on actual proven instructional models - more so than, say, HBW. As for ATS, that's not a certified program; but it obviously is based on a long tradition of successful educating that shouldn't have to be a "pedagogy and certified." It should merely be incorporated into every neighborhood school in the system. Furthermore, all teachers are certified to teach by a recognized authority (well, eventually - that's another issue: APS is not hiring the most qualified teachers anymore, partly because the pool of candidates isn't what it used to be).

I don't believe required specialized training and certification need to be the deciding factors for what programs APS implements or retains. Performance v. neighborhood schools, viability, any additional costs, feasibility of persistently providing the quality and # of teachers needed, level of interest, level of distinction v ability to implement key aspects into the "regular" classroom, role in the K-12 spectrum, etc.

[Anonymous]

I saw a post on AEM that we should all go to the county board meeting and ask the county for even more money. This is insane to me. APS needs to live within its means. Make the hard choices, have the tough conversations and move on. Not one more penny from the county until the Syphax bloat is cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cutting the aquatics field trip will save almost no money. APS barely funds field trips. Mostly to planetarium, outdoor lab and pools. PTAs fundraise for Jamestown and the like.

Kids like pool week. No sense in cutting it. And APS is not going to fund something better.

Careful. I'm sure people would like to eliminate the Planetarium trips, too. Don't remind them!

How much does APS spend on the planetarium?

The planetarium nonprofit “The Friends” took over a lot of the spending during a previous round of budget cuts. There are many things APS used to fund that are now funded through donations and by volunteers. I guess it’s a trend all over the country. The expectations for government services are just much lower than in the olden days.

are you kidding? in the olden days, my school system sure as h*ll did not have its own auditorium or private forest.

IMO, the planetarium, the outdoor forest, and sending kids to TJHSST are the 3 things that stand out for APS. Both the planetarium and outdoor lab are unique to APS and EVERY student has access. TJHSST, I've gone back and forth on; but I've settled on it being a good thing. Maybe some costs can be reduced/recovered with scaled transportation fees or maybe Arlington TJ parents can expand carpooling; but participating in the program does not cost more per pupil than APS spends and provides a very unique opportunity that APS cannot provide.

Therefore, IMO, these 3 aspects of APS are worth the relatively minimal investments. The real luxury items are all the option programs and iPads for every student through 8th grade. These are the first things that should be looked at the very instant step one - eliminating the fluff at Syphax, eliminating all the paid vacation for Syphax employees, and reducing the Superintendent's benefit package (does that position still get a provided car???) - is done. Then get the County serious about coordinating ART routes and get all 6th - 12th graders off yellow school buses.

I agree with you that every kid doesn’t need an iPad, but I have never understood why people think option programs are so expensive. It’s not like kids in option programs would all move to private. APS would still have to pay for teachers, principals and buy textbooks etc if the schools became neighborhood schools.

1. Additional transportation. yes, many would be on buses anyway, but to the same schools and not buses collecting students from across the county.
2. Can't just hire any old teacher or re-allocate teachers from other schools. You need bilingual/Spanish-speaking teachers for immersion; Montessori requires specialized training; etc.
3. Montessori also requires more teachers - an additional teacher in every classroom.
4. Paying extra for additional/different materials and curriculum.
5. IB programs/schools require a fee to the IB Organization to be recognized as an IB school.
6. IB teachers also require specialized training.
7. Running multiple options is a collective expense.

Can’t speak for others but Montessori is priced in the middle of all Arl ES. Did you see the AEM post showing cost per pupil? Montessori teachers should be certified as such but they do that on their own dime - they get no reimbursement or extra pay compared with other teachers. Also, the APS Montessori model is 2 adults, not two teachers in a class (and I don’t think you’ll find an APS Montessori class with two teachers even though there should be). And Montessori materials last for years or decades, literally, some teachers will carry some same materials their whole careers. That means the annual costs are lower because you’re not buying whole new textbooks and tools every SY. Again, look at the cost per pupil. There are neighborhood NArl ES significantly higher than all options. Why?

Because cost per pupil as shown in that report is based on the actual salaries in each building, which depends on the mix of tenure and degrees. If you have more teachers with long tenure in a given building, the average cost will be higher. If you have a lot of younger/newer teachers in a building, the average cost will be lower. You could shuffle those teachers around and have two buildings with the exact same average costs.

It's a meaningless statistic, unless you really value sending your kids to a school where the pool of teachers (not just your child's individual classroom teacher) on average have more experience and more master's degrees than other schools in the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw a post on AEM that we should all go to the county board meeting and ask the county for even more money. This is insane to me. APS needs to live within its means. Make the hard choices, have the tough conversations and move on. Not one more penny from the county until the Syphax bloat is cut.

Reducing a few positions in Syphax isn't going to materially affect the discrepancy in the budget.

If our community values education (it should) then it should appropriately pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw a post on AEM that we should all go to the county board meeting and ask the county for even more money. This is insane to me. APS needs to live within its means. Make the hard choices, have the tough conversations and move on. Not one more penny from the county until the Syphax bloat is cut.

I think there's room on both sides. I don't think simply raising taxes every year is the solution at all, and many people can't continue affording the increased tax payments every year (which rise even when the rate does not because assessed values rise each year). As others have been pointing out, our cost per pupil is calculated differently and is higher than other jurisdictions because APS' budget is responsible for the capital improvement stuff. If people think APS overspends on its fancy new buildings, let the County do it. They'll need to work closely with APS staff who know what educational facilities require and sync budgets, though; and we already know they don't seem able to coordinate well.

I think it's silly for APS to have to "rent" parking space from the County during the Career Center construction, for example. That comes out of APS' budget; but it's literally handing money back and forth between the two boards. The maintenance and landscaping pieces of the agreement are similarly stupid. The County's paying for it now, why can't they just keep paying for it while the schools use it?

[Anonymous]

The cost of education rises each year as COL increases.

[Anonymous]

We should all demand that the county pay for the interest on the CIP bonds. That would make a big difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

Any positions where certified teachers are in an office while vacancies exist in classrooms, for one. That’s just grossly incompetent/ negligent. DEI can be one person. Content areas can have a coordinator, a supervisor, a director, or a specialist, but not all 4. I’d start there.

Disagree strongly. Experienced and knowledgeable teachers are precisely who you should have helping administer/manage a school system.

+1

There will always been the need for subs. But that’s a different resource pool than administrators. Want fewer/better subs? Improve conditions/pay for teachers and subs. The solution isn’t pulling from staff.

No way. We’ve had some vacancies for months. For months, kids in a science classroom, for one example, while there are 3 certified science educators in Syphax… supporting what? That’s a huge hell no for me. APS is in the business of teaching and learning, and teachers in classrooms are fundamental to this.

So irrational. If they don’t need 3 science admins that’s one thing. But if they do, then no, we shouldn’t be pulling subs from syphax.

The solution is to hire more long-term subs. Improve pay for teachers and subs. And reduce workload/administrative responsibilities so they don’t burnout as much.

Raise taxes to fund the schools our community needs.

I’m all about the schools being funded, but I think it’s perfectly reasonable to expect someone in Central Office to get their ass back in a classroom when qualified teacher cannot be found.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

Any positions where certified teachers are in an office while vacancies exist in classrooms, for one. That’s just grossly incompetent/ negligent. DEI can be one person. Content areas can have a coordinator, a supervisor, a director, or a specialist, but not all 4. I’d start there.

Disagree strongly. Experienced and knowledgeable teachers are precisely who you should have helping administer/manage a school system.

Really? Look, I will take a teacher for any role in teaching and learning at the district level any day. But just like a doctor isn’t the right fit for every hospital admin role, I don’t think teachers probably have the best fit skills for, say, optimizing facilities or bus routes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

Any positions where certified teachers are in an office while vacancies exist in classrooms, for one. That’s just grossly incompetent/ negligent. DEI can be one person. Content areas can have a coordinator, a supervisor, a director, or a specialist, but not all 4. I’d start there.

Disagree strongly. Experienced and knowledgeable teachers are precisely who you should have helping administer/manage a school system.

Really? Look, I will take a teacher for any role in teaching and learning at the district level any day. But just like a doctor isn’t the right fit for every hospital admin role, I don’t think teachers probably have the best fit skills for, say, optimizing facilities or bus routes.

They are involved in content, not bus routes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

Any positions where certified teachers are in an office while vacancies exist in classrooms, for one. That’s just grossly incompetent/ negligent. DEI can be one person. Content areas can have a coordinator, a supervisor, a director, or a specialist, but not all 4. I’d start there.

Disagree strongly. Experienced and knowledgeable teachers are precisely who you should have helping administer/manage a school system.

Really? Look, I will take a teacher for any role in teaching and learning at the district level any day. But just like a doctor isn’t the right fit for every hospital admin role, I don’t think teachers probably have the best fit skills for, say, optimizing facilities or bus routes.

They are involved in content, not bus routes.

Who’s over HR now? That’s been rough. That it was an educator by background, but maybe was changed. Definitely was at one point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a post on AEM that we should all go to the county board meeting and ask the county for even more money. This is insane to me. APS needs to live within its means. Make the hard choices, have the tough conversations and move on. Not one more penny from the county until the Syphax bloat is cut.

Reducing a few positions in Syphax isn't going to materially affect the discrepancy in the budget.

If our community values education (it should) then it should appropriately pay for it.

Think again...APS Organizational Chart 2023 - 2024 https://apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2024/02/APS-Organizational-Chart-020124.pdf

Superintendent’s Cabinet: 8 people
Executive Leadership Team: 30 people (includes Principals)
Chief of Staff Office: 18 people
Chief Operating Office: 23 people
Chief of School Support Office: 38 people (includes Principals)
Chief Academic Office: 26 people (not including Supervisors, Specialists, etc.- maybe another 40 people?)
Division Counsel Office: 3 people
Chief Diversity, Equity & Inclusion and Student Support Office: 13 people
School & Community Relations: 10 people

Not included above: administrative assistants, others.
It's not just the number of positions, it's also all the additional paid leave Syphax positions were granted.