School district breaks promises (Oct. 23)
Music Video: “Broken Promises” by Dillon Lane
When the Madera Unified Teachers’ Association (MUTA) went into negotiations last year, it was our intent to save the class-size reduction to 24.5 students to 1 teacher. The teachers, counselors, librarians and nurses took two unpaid days (about a 2 percent pay cut) to keep classes small. Those two days were also preparation days, days where we would not impact the students’ school year. Over 45 teachers were not rehired this past year due to increasing the class sizes to 24.5 to 1.
Now, the Madera Unified School District has informed us that they are raising the class sizes of kindergarten to 33 and first through third to 32. Fourth grade to 12 are already at 38 students to 1 teacher.
Last year the California School Employees’ Association (CSEA) gave 10 days (five of which the School District gave back) to Madera Unified School District in order to save jobs. This year the School District cut over 60 CSEA jobs.
The Madera Unified School District promised the community that the cuts they made would “stay away from the classrooms.” With class sizes increasing, fewer teachers teaching, and less support staff to provide for the schools, I would say that promise is broken too.
Last year only one administrative position was cut in all the cuts made last year.
Promises were made to teachers, school support staff, nurses, counselors, bus drivers, librarians and to you, the voting public, and all those promises have been broken.
By raising the class sizes to 33 and 32 students to 1 in the primary grades, the school district will lose 30 percent of the money it receives for each child. That is a 10 percent unexpected cut that the board did not anticipate in its budget. Where will the board find that extra 10 percent? I won’t say, but I am willing to bet another promise will be broken.
John F. Seybold,
1st vice president, Madera Unified Teachers’ Association
And why would anyone be surprised at the actions of MUSD?
Just look how they have treated the teacher, support teachers and others over the last 5 years. I know I’m one that has been passed over and used by this district many times.
Someone told me long ago that i should not take teaching so close to heart. That I should not care about my students. That I should not give so much. That after all it is just a job, and I can be cut real easy.
Maybe I should have listened. Even my union didn’t seem to care, but still collected my dues. Now as a lowly sub with a masters, NCLB and CLAD, they have the gall to hold my paycheck for two months.
Do you know how close I am to being a Homeless California Teacher? Do you think MUSD cares?
Gone is music, art, science, and other subjects that require critical thinking. Students are no longer much more than state tested cash cows. It is so sad.
So NO suprise here about what MUSD is doing.
Last week, John Seybold of the Madera Unified Teachers Association (MUTA) wrote a letter to the Madera Tribune regarding our district increasing class sizes and “breaking promises.” Unfortunately, Mr. Seybold’s letter contained numerous factual errors and misrepresentations, and a clarification is in order.
Mr. Seybold claimed Madera Unified “has informed (MUTA) that they are raising the class sizes of kindergarten to 33 and first through third to 32.” This is absolutely incorrect. The numbers referenced by Mr. Seybold are the statutory class size limits as set by the state of California, but they are not our district’s plan or intention. At no time has the Madera Unified Board of Education or district administration ever considered the option of increasing class sizes to 32 and 33 at the primary grades (grades K-3).
In reality, 89 percent of the district’s K-3 classrooms have 24 students or less. The average size of a Madera Unified K-3 class is 23 students, and only seven classrooms (out of 276 total classrooms) exceed 25 students. There isn’t a single primary grade level that surpasses an average of 24 students — kindergarten: 23 students; first grade: 23.3; second grade: 22.9; third grade: 22.7.
As Mr. Seybold knows, the number of students we have in each grade level varies — sometimes significantly — from attendance area to attendance area. This results in a small number of K-3 classes being above our average of 24.5 students, and many with less. We do everything we can to keep them at 24.5 given the resources we have available, and also while giving heavy consideration to the educational experience of the student.
There are several variables that factor into our decision regarding where to place students when we have reached an average of 24.5 students in a classroom. We must weigh the impact of adding a student to a class of 24 or 25, and thus moving above our stated goal of 24.5, against busing a student to another site. While transporting a student does keep our K-3 classroom numbers down, it is not always in the best interests of our students to miss as much as 40 minutes, if not more, of instructional time during the school day being transported to their overflow site.
This is why, on occasion, we will enroll a K-3 student in a classroom with 24 or more students, particularly if there are only a very few students to transport. We collaborate on these decisions with site administrators, who inform us it is also their desire to see students remain in their home attendance areas rather than be transported to another site, even if it means a class size will increase ever so slightly.
Mr. Seybold was also incorrect in his claims that, by exceeding a class size average of 24.5 at the K-3 grades, the district “will lose 30 percent of the money it receives for each child.” If the district receives a penalty for exceeding 24.5 students in a K-3 class, the penalty is assessed per class, and not per student. For each class we exceed an average of 24.5 students, the district is assessed a penalty of $2,142. We monitor our class sizes on a weekly basis to ensure that, in the midst of a difficult budgetary environment, we make every effort to limit class size penalties.
Yet another inaccuracy in Mr. Seybold’s letter was his claim MUTA took “about a 2 percent pay cut” through two-day work furloughs. In actuality, that amount is about 1 percent. And while Mr. Seybold did correctly recognize classified employees for their acceptance of a five-day work furlough, he conveniently omitted that all administrators — from the superintendent to vice principals — took five-day furloughs with an average pay reduction of 2.3 percent. It was administrators who were the first to take a pay reduction last year, and they remain the only group to have expressed their intent to do so again next year.
Mr. Seybold was certainly within his rights to write a letter to the Madera Tribune last week. However, when facts are completely misrepresented, a response becomes necessary.
John R. Stafford,
superintendent of the Madera Unified School District
…about your schools? When was the last time you visited with teachers?
FYI they do bus a lot of students to schools other than their home base if enrollment is down, lower than 24, in that grade to another school.
After seeing empty classrooms at schools where these students were bussed from, why could they not have kept a teacher and made a combo class?
About those empty classrooms. Why not use them for after school art/crafts or science club or music ?
After having students in Club YES , I can tell you it is not that great and they only takes X amount of students. They are really just babysitters and you know it.
Seems funding could be better spent in this district to serve students.