Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Walls administration had choice on what positions/programs to cut. They chose to cut theater.
The Walls admin proposed cutting 1 counselor (Walls has 4) and 1 world language teacher. The LSAT requested more options. They didn’t like the 2nd option (cut two teachers) and proposed eliminating special ed teachers and having staff with dual credentials provide support for special needs students. That wasn’t viable. So LSAT voted and most supported cutting two teachers. Admin could have overruled LSAT, but did not. But this was not the option admin wanted.
They have 1 Special Ed Teacher.
How could they cut this position?
By having the staff with dual credentials provide special ed services. It would have worked. There are several teachers at the school who are dual certified.
When the Special Ed teacher went out on family leave - NO ONE was providing special education services. The school chose to be in non-compliance as opposed to having services provided by dual certified teachers.
I am surprised that they exist because the AP at the time was saying - so sorry there are no options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Walls administration had choice on what positions/programs to cut. They chose to cut theater.
The Walls admin proposed cutting 1 counselor (Walls has 4) and 1 world language teacher. The LSAT requested more options. They didn’t like the 2nd option (cut two teachers) and proposed eliminating special ed teachers and having staff with dual credentials provide support for special needs students. That wasn’t viable. So LSAT voted and most supported cutting two teachers. Admin could have overruled LSAT, but did not. But this was not the option admin wanted.
They have 1 Special Ed Teacher.
How could they cut this position?
By having the staff with dual credentials provide special ed services. It would have worked. There are several teachers at the school who are dual certified.